User talk:Tachyon502

Hippocratic Oath for Scientists

The key problem is that the information is not significant enough for a general encyclopedia article on Physicist. Each article should contain the most relevant information, not every possible scrap of potentially connected information. Lots of people have made comments about physicists; this one has had little to no impact. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

One good choide would be the Philosophy of science article, which has a section on accountability. It couls very appropriately be linked and discussed briefly there. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Police state debate

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For maintaining your unique civility throughout our discussion ;). AzureFury (talk | contribs) 08:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Police state

Tachyon, thanks for contacting me. I really wish I had some time to offer my guidance on police state. Alas, I'm currently flooded with work at school and elsewhere. I can tell you at first glance that the article needs to be much more comprehensive before it goes to Featured Article review. I expect that FA reviewers would require (these are off the top of my head):

• A thorough history of the term, including pre-histories and proto-police state models before the term was coined;
• Numerous specific examples from around the world, from a variety of historical contexts;
• A discussion of the justifications and criticisms of police states and state authority in general; and
• Images which add to the reader's understanding of the concept and examples.

If you haven't already done so, be sure to read WP:FA?, as it discusses the requirements for Featured Articles. (The "Advice from Wikipedians" items at the bottom of that page are also very useful.)

Good luck with this. Like I said, I wish I could be more helpful. Right now, unfortunately, it's just not possible. Scartol • Tok 14:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Policestate2.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Policestate2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 18:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Viktor Schauberger

Tachyon, I have previously questioned one of your references on the VS page, namely the reference: "Scientific Genius and Uneducated Guesswork", Professor Joseph Silk, Oxford University Press, 2000. I have contacted numerous Oxford University Press departments both locally and overseas and they have never heard of or have reference to this publication. I then emailed professor J.Silk about this reference, to which he replied "i have not written this book. it's an erroneous citation!". I hope you understand because of this, I have removed your reference.

Regards, MrAnderson7 (talk) 02:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Angela Brooks

The article Angela Brooks has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This seems to be a spoof based on Cheryl Cole - many details, including dob and imdb link are Cole's. Contains much patent nonsense, eg the prospective Victoria Cross for a 26 year old singer.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Grafen (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Policestate.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Policestate.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. JaGa^talk 20:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:DSC02292.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DSC02292.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fallschirmjäger ✉ 17:17, 3 August 2011 (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) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)