User talk:Jssteil/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Teahouse logo
Hello! Jssteil, you are invited to join other new editors at the Wikipedia Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on wiki where you can ask questions about editing and receive support & help from experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Sarah (talk) 01:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


Hi Jssteil,

I see you're editing Spaceflight related material, would you like some assistance with the work you are doing ? Penyulap ☏ 23:29, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I found a larger version of the image in the article you are writing, I've added it for you along with two others, I hope you don't mind, and please feel free to remove them or change them as you see fit, I think you have good editorial skills and I like you work. Penyulap ☏ 00:30, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Penyulap, thanks for the encouragement. I appreciate your input. Thank you for the photos! Any suggestions or best practices you may have are greatly appreciated. Jssteil (talk) 04:56, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Well for now, just keep up the good work ! :) Later when I have time I'll help with a small technical issue about the page, but it's nothing urgent. If you have any questions or difficulties just ask, because I'd like to help. Penyulap ☏ 10:42, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
I changed the acknowledgements part a little on the portal, another editor or two were concerned about it being against some rule or other. I hope you don't mind the manner in which I have changed it, and please do change it back, or change it more just as you please.
I actually think it was a little cheeky of me the manner in which I addressed the issue, as it now gives more acknowledgement rather than less :) whilst fixing the problem, which, I can't remember precisely off the top of my head. That was the small technical thing, and I think it may be fixed now. Penyulap ☏ 09:52, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Portal:Human Health and Performance in Space/VIIP

A tag has been placed on Portal:Human Health and Performance in Space/VIIP requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section P1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a portal which would be subject to speedy deletion if it were an article.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. WWGB (talk) 00:31, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

It's just the smaller bit so I wouldn't worry, you can create it again later when you have extra material for it, the other thing to do, which I have done for some time, is to make extra pages which are part of your user space, they don't get deleted and you can work in peace and quiet there until the material is large enough so that it will be left alone. May I suggest this as a workspace name ? Penyulap ☏ 02:23, 8 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Penyulap I see that the VIIP page was deleted this morning before I could add content. How do I go about re-creating it when I have all of my initial content ready? Thanks again for your help with this! Jssteil (talk) 13:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
You can do it the same way, although, it is also possible some of the work is more an article than a portal, although, to be honest I'm not sure of the differences myself, except that a portal is some kind of index really, and the pages within it are articles. Probably good to make some of the information into articles, like leaves on a tree, otherwise it's all tree trunk. But it doesn't matter, because we can always add more leaves :)
but don't forget to click here and put your work in and save it, then you will always have a copy to work from, I can help put it in the right place if you like, and add some categories and templates and things at the bottom, for navigation and so on. I do quite like that sort of thing. Penyulap ☏ 14:48, 8 Jun 2012 (UTC)
may I rename Radiation Carcinogenesis from being a portal inside another portal to being an article within the portal, is it ok with you if I fix that, nothing gets deleted, just the name "Human Health and Performance in Space/Radiation Carcinogenesis" becomes "Radiation Carcinogenesis" within the Human Health and Performance in Space portal, cool ? I can hook it up into the ISS article as well, so that readers will be able to find it easily as well, or help you to do the linking into other articles if you are interested. Penyulap ☏ 20:35, 18 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Absolutely! Can you tell me the best way to do this and I will do this to the other pages as well? Jssteil (talk) 19:53, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
I didn't know if the portal would cause trouble compared to a regular article, it seems it is just fine. there is a small triangle at the top of the page next to the search box you type in. that is where the move menu is. It may be accessible to you now, because you most likely have enough edits, I think that is how it works. If not, I can help. Penyulap ☏ 01:39, 20 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Excellent, thank you for the info. Jssteil (talk) 01:43, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Penyulap, you have been a font of information so far and I am very grateful for all of your help. I have one more question for you...I am trying to change the displayed heading for the VIIP article to read "Visual Impairment and Intracranial Pressure", but keep the article link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VIIP. How can I do this? Jssteil (talk) 02:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
you're welcome. if you put #redirect [[nameofnewrticle]] onto a page, then people who open that page are automatically moved along and the new page opens instead. The pages that you have moved now have redirects on their old page, when you type the old name, at the top of the new article it will show redirected from oldpagename, and you can click on that link to go back to the old page, edit that old page, and have a look. I am going offline for some hours about now. Penyulap ☏ 02:31, 20 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Citation Tag Disappears?

Penyulap, I apologize for bugging you, but I was wondering if you could help me out with an issue I have been having. In this section of my radiation page, I have been trying to add a citation to the second paragraph with a named reference. Every time I add ref name=126 to the beginning of the tag, the [#] disappears. Could you take a look at it and see if I'm just missing something? - Jssteil (talk) 18:43, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

you're not bugging me, I think the problem is the character # is used as code for other things, to trigger software or something, so just use some other piece of text like Number126 or Page126, the software likes reference names that are in numbers or letters I think, # mush be telling it to do something (I have no idea what, but I could find out if it is important) I'd just choose any name you like from letters and numbers without symbols, as readers don't see the labels for the references, so reference names can be "Big boring book" or "Best reference I ever found" :) Penyulap ☏ 23:52, 8 Jun 2012 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP Publ. 60, EU BSS 1996.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP Publ. 60, EU BSS 1996.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 23:41, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Stefan2, thank you for your concern over legitimate copyright use. I apologize for not adding this earlier, as I was interrupted from my work. I have updated the "License" section of both images with the copyright release directly from the website's Copyright page. Also, the information provided in the tables within the images are industry standards for radiological studies. As for my other photographs, they were all obtained from NASA's repository and are considered Public Domain. Jssteil (talk) 00:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP 2007.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP 2007.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 01:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP 2007.jpg

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.

A tag has been placed on File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP 2007.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 12:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP Publ. 60, EU BSS 1996.jpg

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.

A tag has been placed on File:Tissue Weighting Factors - ICRP Publ. 60, EU BSS 1996.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 12:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

achive?

would you like me to set up automatic archiving of your talkpage for you ? Penyulap ☏ 13:40, 20 Jun 2012 (UTC)

What does that do? Jssteil (talk) 15:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
puts away stuff on your talkpage once it gets old, like after you have read it. you can set it for different times, like I suggest 1 month old stuff. you can just have a small index box or link at the top of your page which you click to read the old things, on my talkpage it is the caption for the telephone booths image. Penyulap ☏ 15:50, 20 Jun 2012 (UTC)

some code for the tables

there is code for the tables here, although you can probably get an idea from this one I have done, and you can just copy and edit the text for other data.

Organ Tissue weighting factor T
Gonads 0.20
Colon 0.12
Bone marrow (red) 0.12
Lung 0.12
Stomach 0.12
Bladder 0.05
Chest 0.05
Liver 0.05
Thyroid gland 0.05
Oesophagus 0.05
Skin 0.01
Bone surface 0.01
Adrenals, brain, small intestine,
kidney, muscle, pancreas,
spleen, thymus, uterus 		(the weighting factor 0.05 is applied to
the average dose of these organs)
Excellent! Thanks for the info! Jssteil (talk) 01:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
you're welcome. Penyulap ☏ 08:46, 21 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Jssteil/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by heather walls (talk) 05:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Teahouse

Hello, Jssteil/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by NeilN talk to me 05:06, 2 July 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
Replied again. --NeilN talk to me 05:32, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss During Spaceflight/Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss During Spaceflight/Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/evidence/reports/sleep.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss During Spaceflight/Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing!   —Chris Capoccia T⁄C 11:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Treating An Ill or Injured Crew Member In Space/Evidence for treating ill or injured crew members

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Treating An Ill or Injured Crew Member In Space/Evidence for treating ill or injured crew members, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/evidence/reports/exmc.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Treating An Ill or Injured Crew Member In Space/Evidence for treating ill or injured crew members saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing!   —Chris Capoccia T⁄C 11:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Spaceflight radiation carcinogenesis/Epidemiology data for low-linear energy transfer radiation

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Spaceflight radiation carcinogenesis/Epidemiology data for low-linear energy transfer radiation, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/evidence/reports/carcinogenesis.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Spaceflight radiation carcinogenesis/Epidemiology data for low-linear energy transfer radiation saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing!   —Chris Capoccia T⁄C 11:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Subpages

Please don't create article subpages. We just don't do that on Wikipedia, ever. (Outside of project pages. But actual articles don't have subpages.) — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 19:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for that, but the subpages are supposed to be offshoots of information from the original main article. Is there a better way to accomplish the same parent/child effect?Jssteil (talk) 15:21, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't know what special effects you want but we only use simple, encyclopedia-like article titles. See also: WP:TITLE. Please remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not an indiscriminate collection of information. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Jeraphine, you could do better communicating here I think, if you made some simple suggestions. For example, you could suggest that instead of making article sub pages, Jssteil could simply make articles, and then link the sub articles into the main article. Going off into vagueness like 'indiscriminate collection' and so on doesn't really help very much as it doesn't give a direction to head in. Penyulap ☏ 05:39, 13 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem: User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/evidence/reports/carcinogenesis.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

  • If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at [[Talk:User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions]] and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at [[Talk:User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions]] with a link to where we can find that note.
  • If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on [[Talk:User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions]]. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at [[Talk:User:Jssteil/sandbox/Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions]] saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing!   —Chris Capoccia T⁄C 18:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Cris Capoccia, thank you for your concern regarding potential copyright violations. The information that is being provided has been previously released by NASA and is in the public domain. Also, I have been tasked by the NASA program which owns this document to add the information to Wikipedia. I have added a statement to all of the affected articles' talk pages stating as much. Please let me know if any further information is needed from me and I will be happy to provide it. Jssteil (talk) 15:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
With all due respect, Jssteil, we do not care what NASA has tasked you with. As far as I know, they don't own Wikipedia. Wikipedia has its own rules and standards for content. I really feel that a lot of the content you're trying to add is not suitable as encyclopedia articles. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Jeraphine Gryphon, I'm wondering does it matter why public domain material is added, so long as it is worthwhile adding it ? Penyulap ☏ 16:44, 12 Jul 2012 (UTC)
My concerns have nothing to do with copyright. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 16:57, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Ok, so it's not copyright, is it notability ? Penyulap ☏ 20:05, 12 Jul 2012 (UTC)
It's the topic/title. We don't host essays or research results here, only encyclopedic articles. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 22:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey that's great ! now we are getting somewhere, before you had not mentioned 'title' so I couldn't work out what on earth you were trying to say, I'm glad that is cleared up. Do you have some suggestions for a new title ? Penyulap ☏ 05:32, 13 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss During Spaceflight/Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload

The article Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss During Spaceflight/Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not an appropriate topic/title for an article; copyright concerns.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload 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/Ground based evidence for performance errors due to fatigue and work overload until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 16:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Evidence for treating ill or injured crew members for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Evidence for treating ill or injured crew members 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/Evidence for treating ill or injured crew members until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. MER-C 03:05, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

The lead section (that's the first paragraph before the table of contents) looks spot-on, exactly what we need. The emergencies/ non emergency sections have lists they don't need, so make sentences instead from the same items, so it is like " motion sickness, headache, sleeplessness, back pain, trauma, burns" instead of a list Penyulap ☏ 02:33, 17 Jul 2012 (UTC)
Agreed.Jssteil (talk) 03:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Potential conflict of interest

You have indicated that you are editing on the behest of NASA, primarily to include NASA documents as sources.[1] Doing so would fall under Wikipedia's conflict of interest. As such, your editing should be careful and thoughtful and defer to outside editors if the sense that your edits may be putting the interests of NASA ahead of the interest of Wikipedia. -- The Red Pen of Doom 16:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello TheRedPenOfDoom! While I am adding information at the behest of a NASA project, it is in the interest of creating involvement from the greater scientific an academic community. Actually, we are encouraging outside editors to become more involved with the evolution of these articles. I do have plans on moving the non-encyclopedic material from Wikipedia, to a more suitable location (sometime today, actually). Thank you for your concern, but I do assure you that this was not an attempt for selfless self promotion. Jssteil (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Jssteil, I think it's great you decide to be more involved, but I just want to emphasize again that Wikipedia articles should be "encyclopedic" in nature. I don't know what kind of time or willingness you have, but it seems like a better idea to use the sources you have to improve existing articles?
Also, someone may have linked there already but isn't WikiSource more appropriate for this? I haven't actually read the text but does it qualify as "scientific research"? Read here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:What_Wikisource_includes#Scientific_research
— Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Jeraphine Gryphon, actually, that is exactly where I am relocating these pages to. Would you know of an automated way of doing this? I am in the process of creating the main article right now (since these smaller articles are parts of a larger work). Jssteil (talk) 18:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Someone here: [[2]] [3]may be able to connect you with ideas and resources and tools. -- The Red Pen of Doom 19:20, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
The suggestions about wikisource and so on are great, and worth investigating Jssteil, however the COI is pretty much going to fall flat on it's face as there is no improper conduct at all. You've declared it, and are editing pretty much the usual newbie fashion without stepping on anyones toes. Relying on a single source is not fantastic, but relying on NASA is everyone's hobby on English Wikipedia, most of the editors seem to do that, even the good ones. The ISS article "read like a NASA brochure" and passed through into FA status with a "heavy reliance on a single source"(NASA). I personally don't like it, and have done the editing to the ISS article basically to fix that exact problem, so yes it is a problem but unfortunately for me, not one that's going to see anyone get smacked over, because it's main street wp:bias and you're the town hall.
I recall the editor Lee Brandon Cremer, a great editor here with a focus on the ORU's of the ISS, did some awesome focused work in that area the same way as you are filling in the blanks for our spaceflight articles with medical content. Thing is, Lee got mauled by other editors on the ISS article and has since left, whereas you are still with us, and making great content and learning new skills like moving articles and so on, prior to incorporating the content into the main articles. So that's great, so log as WP:BITE is observed closely by other editors and they give constructive ideas and leads to follow as they have been doing, rather than shouting it's not encyclopaedic which is like not constructive in any way, it'll go great. I look forward to things going right, I can't stand how often I have seen things go bad, like Ralf Vandebergh who whose edits to the ISS article got reverted without any thought to the content, which was f*%$ing brilliant by the way, NASA picture of the day and all that too, but not good enough to warrant taking a look at by other editors until I took a look.

(btw I don't mean to call you the town hall, I haven't seen any great problems in your writing, just a very typical focus on NASA referencing. OMG, it's like the Electrical system of the International Space Station all over again.) man that is one dumbass article. Penyulap ☏ 01:25, 14 Jul 2012 (UTC)

There IS a large difference between a general public tending to default and look for/choose a particular source and people related to that source actively inserting references to their own work into Wikipedia articles. The potential for conflict of interest is such that doing so has been specifically called out in the COI guidelines Wikipedia:COI#Citing_oneself "Excessive self-citation is strongly discouraged. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion. In any case, citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work, giving proper due to the work of others as in a review article."-- The Red Pen of Doom 13:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not an author nor an editor on any of these sources and had no participation in the creation, investigation or publishing of them. What I am adding is meant to act as a seed for those who do study these topics.Jssteil (talk) 20:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
you are working at the direct behest of the organization that did write and publish them. thats the issue. yes NASA does a lot of good and important and informative studies, but it is up to people outside of NASA (and those they are capable of "tasking") to make the determination about which ones are appropriate for supporting content in Wikipedia. -- The Red Pen of Doom 06:59, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
She's an editor like everyone else with the exception that we should all be jealous. She's getting paid to do what we do for free. Further, I like the idea of having someone to fill in the boring gaps that we have in the spaceflight articles, we have medical/health sections in every single space station article, and where is the daughter article ? we got ZIP. Now if we could only find someone paid to fill in the banks on the science sections too, wooHoo! we'd be going places there as well, Science is supposedly one main purpose of the ISS, what with it being a flying laboratory and all, but look at the daughter article... WARNING, WEAR SUNGLASSES, and then click here that article will burn your eyes right out of their sockets, it is so full of redlinks to notable subjects just the same way the medical stuff leads to dead ends, but I sure ain't going to fix it. Anyhow, all these proposed deletions, we have to merge a lot of it into the ISS article for a start, I know that much, the health section there is abominable, but look at the size of the ISS article and tell me, just how much room do you think there is to go into detail on the subject?
Oh, that raises the question, when you spilt hot coffee into your boss's lap and he screamed out that you had to edit wikipedia from now on, did he yell anything about science-related subjects, or was it like hard to hear with him choking on her own rage at the time ? Wait, that's probably not precisely how it happened, but the question I'm trying to ask is, how much of the job your boss has given you ties into the scientific research on the ISS article, (the sunglasses one) because all of wikipedia agrees that we need those subjects, or at least they did before you came along, and I doubt they will be pedantic enough to un-redlink the entire article, so as a huge portion of the scientific research IS medical research, yeah, just click a redlink from that article, take your pick, and then write what you want, end of deletion debate discussion as there is already at least one other editor there who thinks it's notable. You can also ask me, I won't say everything is notable, I mean there is some seriously boring rubbish NASA churns out that we don't need, but there is also a HUGE amount that is needed. There is no talk of human spaceflight which doesn't touch on medical discussion. Penyulap ☏ 06:58, 17 Jul 2012 (UTC)
you can like all you want, but the policy is clear "sing material you yourself have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant and conforms to the content policies, particularly WP:SELFPUB. Excessive self-citation is strongly discouraged. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion. In any case, citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work, giving proper due to the work of others as in a review article." If you wish to change policy, you can open up that can of worms. -- The Red Pen of Doom 07:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, well, that is fairly stated, and doubtless a brilliant summary of the policy. Almost all cases of self-publication is some nobody writing something up in their unknown facebook page website thingy and then citing that. It's usually a fail because it's not a reliable source and nothing but an act of God is going to make it notable. If you go to the WP:RS noticeboard and ask them, hey !! guys !! who is this nobody called NASA ? yeah I can see where that goes. Do you know that pretty much every acronym on wikipedia has to be expanded on at least once in an article ? But amazingly, NASA doesn't need to conform to that policy because they are so well known and notable, they make the list of exceptions.
Now the manner in which wp:selfpub applies is if Jssteil started writing into the NASA article about what a mind-numbingly boring place it is to work, and quoted her own blog as evidence. That would be an epic fail on wp:selfpub street, sorry Jssteil, unless you're editing from Zvezda, nobody is interested.
The part you're looking for, as far as getting closer to the issue you want is WP:pay, however, that too is a problem, because you do need at least a valid argument that the material being added is itself a problem.

(Jssteil is) very strongly discouraged to edit Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that may make (his) edits non-neutral (biased). Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy states that all articles must represent views fairly and without bias, and conflicts of interest may significantly and negatively affect Wikipedia's ability to fulfill this requirement. If Jssteil's financially motivated edits would be non-neutral, she should not post them.

— WP:PAY
So there it is, are her edit's non-neutral. Is she just saying people up in space get sick, when in fact they do not, but NASA is just trying to make us all think so ? If she started on the ISS article saying that there are 8 solar arrays that provide power for the station and was citing NASA websites which do indeed say exactly that, I'd be the very first to drag him over the coals because NASA IS indeed full of shit when it comes to describing their role in the ISS. They'll never on a cold day in *** tell you that the entire USOS is passive, and if it were not for the Russians, and the Russian designed and built Russian orbital segment, then the whole thing would fall from the sky. There is bias you see, plenty of it, and easily a conflict of interest could arise, but where is that conflict here ? where is the distortion ? You should at some point read what is being written and find a problem with it, I'm not saying there are no problems, but that is simply because I have seen nothing so far, every time I see a problem and tell Jssteil, she fixes it. Doesn't get any better than that, I'm just an idiot and I've got NASA working for me, thanks Jssteil. I need a userbox for my userpage saying NASA employees do whatever I say. zomg. lolz. Well, I can get away with it until I give him bad advice or she decides to go off on some tangent against policy or something. I better enjoy boasting while it lasts. Btw Jssteil, sorry if my language is somewhat coarse to your ears, I don't come from the same background as you do, and the h word is not a problem where I come from, I caught myself there, and blanked(***) it out. sorry about that. I realise that is a big problem for North Americans.
Here is a little rant for my stalkers,
Yep, this is where wikipedia is at today, broken. Every one page that goes in requires 6 pages of discussion about it. If I tried to put this word-of-mouth explanation of policy onto the policy, guideline and document pages, like I so often do, it would spark off some 10 page idiotic circus that would go in circles for several weeks with people wailing 'oh the humanity', it will destroy the internet. Yeah, so it's 2 pages here, times 1,000 editors explaining by Chinese whispers, and around it goes as they don't agree. here is an example, however, the WP:OWN policy is ok, I have improved that one no problems. Anyhow, I think you'd be better off with an extra opinion, as I'm rather despondent over all of this, which will make you sceptical, requiring several more pages of discussion over this issue. So, I'd recommend asking some additional spaceflight editors, or at the neutrality noticeboard. Penyulap ☏ 10:00, 17 Jul 2012 (UTC)<inserted note, I have changed my above text after Jssteil had mentioned her gender>

Okay, this is getting silly and everyone needs to calm down. Let's get a couple of facts straight (this is directed to everyone who has been debating this and all other issues). Firstly, if you are going to talk about me on my own board, please use the correct pronoun...I am not a he. Secondly, yes, I have been asked by a NASA program to add content on these topics but although the project as a whole is funded by a NASA program, I never said anything about getting personally paid by NASA to add content on these topics...that is a very bold assumption. Thirdly, fourthly and so on...I am an adult and I have a sense of humor, course language does not bother me. While it seems like I have just done whatever is suggested I should do, I do not do it blindly. I weigh all suggestions given to me and proceed how I see fit...it just so happens to be in agreement with your suggestions thus far.

I do not see how one user adding a few articles on a very niche subject effects the notability of Wikipedia as a whole. The content I am adding is focused towards a very small cross section of the human spaceflight community and, unfortunately, there are not a lot of sources out there besides works published by NASA and their pool of investigators and researchers. It is not my fault that they corner the market on this information...I'm also not here trying to push some sort of personal agenda...I'm just trying to fill in the gaps. If any of my previous comments were actually read, the content that is being added is merely intended to act as seed material for further editing by the scientific community as a whole. Also, if I could return to focusing on adding the data-based information into Wikisource as opposed to defending my edits and worrying if my articles are going to be deleted out from under me, the offending material will be cleaned up sooner rather than later.

All I can say is be patient and see where this goes as opposed to pointing fingers and getting in a fuss over who I may or may not be working for and what my intentions are. Jssteil (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry sis :) What do you mean you don't work for me ? oops, I mean get paid to work for me, argh! I mean what do you mean you don't get paid to work for NASA. If they are not paying the people who do all the work, where does all that cash go ? Ah, I'll be shoosh and let you get back to work. Speaking of which, get back to work <cracks whip, puts feet up on a big boss's desk> :) If you want any help let me know, and btw, I don't think deletionists ever give up that easy. (and you should probably start ignoring me) Penyulap ☏ 13:51, 17 Jul 2012 (UTC)
Ha! No worries...see...another sense of humor! That personality trait is going the way of the do-do these days.Jssteil (talk)
Oh, would you like me to set up automatic archiving of your talkpage for you, so old conversations you have read are tidied up ? Penyulap ☏ 13:54, 17 Jul 2012 (UTC)
Sure...why not...it's getting a little messy on here...Jssteil (talk) 14:20, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Done, should take an hour to a day or two to start clearing, my talkpage broke this bot twice because I talk too much, I have to try another bot soon because my page is getting out of control. Penyulap ☏ 14:44, 17 Jul 2012 (UTC)

hey Jssteil,

sorry for the delays in checking up if everything is ok, I see that you are ok, and I want to let you know I that as ever, I still would like to assist you in any way I can. I have been snowed under with a lot of things, but it gets so stressful that helping with some simple problems and some simple questions would be very refreshing for a change. Would you like help with anything, or do you have any questions ? Penyulap ☏ 12:43, 26 Jul 2012 (UTC)

The creation of articles is moving along nicely. As you see below, I'm still having some issues regarding the content. Any suggestions? Jssteil (talk) 04:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles and content and tagging

1) Please read the text that is right below the "Save" box: "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. "

2) The purpose of the tags at Spaceflight radiation carcinogenesis‎ is to aptly notify the appropriate projects that there is content for contributors to expand on. -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

But that's just it...I AM encouraging people to make edits...I have never said that I do not want people to make edits. What I take issue with is that you are not interested in the content, just the format and how quickly it gets taken care of. I believe that if you stop trying to beat these articles to your will and let them evolve naturally, that your issues will be resolved on their own sooner rather than later. Trust me...I'm not trying to make any enemies here and I'm not trying to promote some sort of hidden agenda...I am trying to figure out why you have zeroed in on these few articles that deal with a very small cross-section of a specialized field.
I will ask you again, as nicely as I know how...please show a little more restraint in your tagging and objections so that I can get these people in the scientific community to come in and make the necessary edits to make it a more encyclopedic article. Jssteil (talk) 04:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a work in progress. The tags 1) help remind readers that, and 2) notify wikipedia editors where there is an issue that they can address to help improve the encyclopedic quality of articles for other readers. While having additional outside scientists join the project is good, having experienced editors how know not only how to write research papers but encyclopedic articles is ALSO VERY GOOD. Just because it made a good research paper does not mean that it makes the good basis for an encyclopedic article without a whole lot of fiddling. The purpose of the two types of writing is very different, and if you don't get that and want to protect "your" articles for only the scientific community to edit, you are in the wrong place.-- The Red Pen of Doom 04:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Now you're just putting words in my mouth. I never said that these were explicitly my articles that I only want scientists working on. All I am trying to say is back off and let people come make changes. Jssteil (talk) 04:40, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Jssteil/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by hajatvrc @ 18:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Scientist and Editor Available

Hello! I hope you enjoy my Wikipedia article on Shuttlecraft (Star Trek). I have been working at Johnson Space Center here in Houston on studies of lunar samples and am co-author of papers on astronaut health hazards, so I could be one of those investigators that Jssteil is inviting. These articles and the connecting portal will need extensive revision, almost page one rewriting. There are problems with adding subpages, use of copyrighted material, and other issues. With a few hundred hours work these problems could be fixed so that the Portal is not in danger of deletion. I hope Jssteil doesn't mind my contributing.Lriofrio (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Lriofrio, thanks for stopping by! I welcome any and all constructive contributions and look forward to see what you (and the rest of the scientific community) have to offer. Please keep in mind that the portal and these articles are still a work in progress and that, like everything in Wikipedia, nothing is in its final state. Jssteil (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Also, I forgot to add that since this material has been published by NASA, it is considered public domain. As long as there is proper attribution (as at the bottom of each of these articles), then there should be no copyright infringement issues. Jssteil (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Here's a cup of coffee for you!

Nice work on the articles that you're writing. Keep it up! Michaelzeng7 (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello Jssteil, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

Jssteil, good luck, and have fun. --Righteousskills (talk) 17:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Epidemiology data for low-linear energy transfer radiation

Can you take a look at the Epidemiology data for low-linear energy transfer radiation article? Figure 4.4, Table 6 and 7 are mentioned in the article but are not present. Also Figure 1 is s redlinked file. Thanks. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that! Yes, I will get that cleaned up soon. Jssteil (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jssteil. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight.
Message added 05:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

N2e (talk) 05:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Inadequate food systems on space exploration missions

Hey; sure :). So:
Wikipedia articles tend to be about a subject, rather than about a possible output of a subject. To put that into context; with 'inadequate food systems on space exploration missions' we have a particular slant on the subject because it presumes inadequacy. A more neutral title and subject might just be "food systems on space exploration missions", which is more neutral and less..I guess, presumptuous, if that makes sense.
They also tend to be (really, have to be) tertiary sources - they don't contain original research as an essay might, or posit a premise or hypothesis. Now, the article itself seems to follow this very well, with the exception of the Current Food System section, which posits a series of hypothetical questions. This makes the article come off as an original work; I'd suggest removing it, and replacing it with "$people have identified several possible risks to adequate food systems on space exploration missions. Amongst these are...." and then descriptions of the issues or open questions at hand, with references.
I hope that helps :). Ironholds (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jssteil. You have new messages at The Potato Hose's talk page.
Message added 08:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— The Potato Hose 08:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Muscle Figure 6-4.jpg

Hi, the reference you added to File:Muscle Figure 6-4.jpg is incomplete. For <ref name="Thornton and Rummel 1977 (10)" /> to work there needs to be <ref name="Thornton and Rummel 1977 (10)" > reference informaiton</ref> on the page. There also needs to be {{reflist}} or <refererences/> somewhere on the page. I have commented the current text out for now so it doesn't create cite errors. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:39, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I just noticed Muscle Figure 6-7.jpg and Muscle Figure 6-5.jpg have the same problem so I commented those out as well.Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:41, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I was going to get to this, but needed to get some sleep too :-) . Thank you for catching it. Jssteil (talk) 16:17, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Adverse health effects from lunar dust exposure

The article Adverse health effects from lunar dust exposure has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Original essay, not encyclopaedic content

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. W. D. Graham 12:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Adverse health effects from lunar dust exposure for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adverse health effects from lunar dust exposure 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/Adverse health effects from lunar dust exposure until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. W. D. Graham 10:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Human Health and Performance in Space concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Human Health and Performance in Space, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 13:25, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 14:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Human Health and Performance in Space

Hello Jssteil. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Human Health and Performance in Space.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Human Health and Performance in Space}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 00:01, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss

Hello Jssteil. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Performance Errors due to Fatigue and Sleep Loss}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 20:02, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Food systems on space exploration missions for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Food systems on space exploration missions 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/Food systems on space exploration missions until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Roches (talk) 13:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions and Food systems on space exploration missions nominated for deletion

Two articles you created, Radiation carcinogenesis in past space missions and Food systems on space exploration missions, appear to largely duplicate the same topics covered in Spaceflight radiation carcinogenesis and Space food, respectively. If you are still active as an editor you may wish to comment on the deletion discussion which can be reached by the link at the top of the articles. It's possible to retrieve deleted articles, but I suggested that the content be moved back to your user sandbox or perhaps to another location. If the nominated articles are deleted, moving them outside the main article space would facilitate you or another editor adding information to Spaceflight radiation carcinogenesis and Space food. Roches (talk) 13:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Human Research Program 2012 (logo).jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Human Research Program 2012 (logo).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ras67 (talk) 04:09, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jssteil/Archive_1&oldid=1143099458"