User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia minor fixes examples

From Astrobiology Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Articles to fix[edit | hide all | hide | edit source]

Very minor wikignoming[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Energy in California - broken link fix with [2]
  2. Vinnytsia - broken link - just mark it as {{Dead link}} as there is no archived copy
  3. Vinnytsia - cite - formatting
  4. Phoenix Lights#Explanations Says 43x magnification. - seems to be typo, source provided says 60x with no occurrence of number 43 in the story[1] and there is no discussion of this on the Wikipedia article talk page.
  5. High-voltage direct current#Advantages for "losses are about 3% per 1,000 km" 3% figure is no longer mentioned in the cited page, or its backup in archive.org[3] - need to replace with this cite:[4]
  6. Wikipedia:Space_elevator_economics#Total_cost_of_a_privately_funded_Edwards'_Space_Elevator - says a total cost of $6 billion. The cite says total cost $20 billion for first 10 years operation, or $40 billion with 100% contingency. Previously summarized correctly. Error introduced with this diff [5], by user who no longer exists[6], nothing on talk page to explain edit.
  7. Wikipedia:AT2018cow need to correct 29 September to 28 September[7]
  8. Wikipedia:Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings#Kettering_Grammar_School add cite for "Observations of Apollo 11" by Sky and Telescope magazine, November 1969, pp. 358–59. add: [8]
  9. "AIDA: Asteroid Impact and Deflection Assessment Mission Under Study at ESA and NASA" (PDF) broken url would fix by linking to Arxiv.org [9]

Article is out of date[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Energy in California Our of date. Cited page now says that by SB 100 California is required to produce 60% renewables by 2030 and all electricity from carbon-free sources by 2045[2]
  2. Carbon capture and storage#Abu Dhabi – United Arab Emirates latest news from them is that they plan to expand from their current capacity of 800,000 tonnes per year to capture 2.3 million tonnes per year by 2025 and 5 million tonnes per year before 2030[3]
  3. Betelgeuse Caption highest-resolution image of Betelgeuse available. - is about a decade out of date. Higher resolution image from 2009 already in this paper[4].
  4. Blue Brain Project and Human Brain Project Several years out of date. Mainly talks about their optimistic projections in the early days of the project. Blue Brain Project has a note asking editors to update it. I would post to the talk page saying that it would be good to add a summary of this article from Scientific American to the page, as they don't cite it and don't seem to be aware of it. It is a good review from 2015 about some of the problems that arose in the attempts to simulate an entire human brain as a neural net [5].
  5. Shutdown of thermohaline circulation Hasn't had significant updates since 2015 as far as I can see. Should for instance cover the two Nature studies described in this Carbon Brief summary [6]
  6. Renewable energy in China - last updated in 2018 and has note asking to be updated.
  7. 2013 Madagscar locust infestation - not updated since 2013 at the height of the swarm, add cite to FAO [10] and summary of response and outcome in 2014 and 2015.
  8. Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market - refers throughout to the draft article. Needs to be updated to refer to the article that they voted on, and in some cases changed (the article they passed differs in details from the last draft they cover there).

Article has a significant mistake in it[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. List of smallest stars#Smallest stars by type - lists diameter of Luhman 16 as 45,000 km based on a link to a non notable Fandom wiki page[11] in Polish. A more notable sourse would be this paper[7] which says 1.0+/-0.2 times the radius of Jupiter i.e. 139,820 km +/-27,960 km
  2. Chicxulub crater says the impactor diameter ranges from 11 to 81 km. The cite is to a preprint, not a WP:RS. 81 is likely a typo for 18. Anyway we can't use it. Most often given as 10-15 km and here is a cite[8]
  3. Asteroid_impact_avoidance#Deflection_efforts says "There is also the threat from comets entering the inner Solar System ... the warning time is unlikely to be more than a few months", source cited says "warning period for a potential impact from a long period comet may be as short as a year"[9]
  4. Wikipedia:2010_AU118 "NEODyS lists the nominal 20 October 2020 Earth distance as 3 AU" - table now says 2.6771 au in the Delta column
  5. Wikipedia:Dew_point - says "When the temperature is below the freezing point of water, the dew point is called the frost point"
    The meteorologist Jeff Haby explains that they are not he same. Dew point is the temperature for 100% humidity in normal conditions (no ice present). Frost point is the temperature for 100% humidity over an ice surface, a higher temperature. This distinction matters for growth of ice in clouds..[10]
  6. Wikipedia:Nuclear_winter#Nuclear_summer Cites an article in New Scientist that no longer exist. [12]. The other cite, an online book chapter from 2002, describes a "nuclear summer" as an increase in harmful UV, not a warming [11] With only these two cites, and lack of details, and can't find any other cites, will post to talk page suggesting "Nuclear summer" should probably be deleted due to insufficient evidence of notability".

Article is missing information or needs more cites[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Strange matter has a request for additional citations for verification. An excellent cite here for strangelets is the LHC safety review in 2011[12] which they don't cite. It also gives additional details that would be useful for the article and includes a short summary of the state of current research on strangelet production. The supplement to the review describes how the LHC confirmed the emerging picture[13].
  2. Type Ia supernova Only gives the critical mass for carbon -oxygen white dwarf stars. Also doesn't cover neutronization / inverse beta decay. Would post to talk page suggesting they have a section on this. Here is one source on the critical masses for white dwarfs for other compositions, such as Helium, Silicon, Sulfur, Iron etc, also taking account of neutronization. [14]
  3. Tunguska event would post telling them about a new reliable source I found, published in 2019, which gives the number of deaths as 3, a figure much discusssed there [15] . Also, new cite from workshop at review level, describing an emerging consensus[16].
  4. Ozone#Physical properties - Colour of ozone - only one cite to the online webelements page[13] and minimal info. I found many better cites which the article could use and more details such as [17] and [18]
  5. Wikipedia:Copernicus_(lunar_crater) - should say something about impactor studies that suggest it formed as a result of an impactor perhaps about 7 km in diameter [14]
  6. Rogue planet for the sentence "The researchers estimated from their observations that there are nearly two Jupiter-mass rogue planets for every star in the Milky Way" should mention the later 2017 study which cast doubt on that result using a larger population of microlensing events and finding at most one Jupiter-mass rogue planet for every four stars in the Milky Way. [19]
  7. Life review - mainly relies on controversial sources such as Pim van Lommel. This may be a good source to add: "Conversely, precognitive visions (e.g., seeing the future) and the experience of life review were among the least frequently reported core features (i.e., occurring <30%)" [20]
  8. History of SpaceX#Setbacks doesn't mention the first three rocket failures though it is covered in Falcon 1[21]
  9. Bajii - should say that the 2016 sighting is regarded as unlikely[22]. Also the lede is confusing, the sentence "It also signified the disappearance of an entire mammal family of river dolphins (Lipotidae)" can give an impression that it means extinction of all river dolphins worldwide. There are three other families of river dolphins. Would be clearer as "It also signified the disappearance of one entire river dolphin mammal family (Lipotidae), leaving only two extant families of river dolphins"
  10. Brane cosmology has nothing about colliding branes, a topic of many papers. Would post to the talk page suggesting it has a section on this topic. See google search[15]. Just one or two sentences may be enough. The intro to this 2015 paper could be a starting point as it reviews previous work on the topic[23]
  11. Loess Plateau has only six cites, last one dated 2006, doesn't even have the World Bank 2007 cite, and is quite short. Many figures from the World Bank page about the project[24]Including: World Bank contributed about half of the funding (China was still eligible for International Development Association funding at the time of the project) For a cost of around half a billion dollars,more than 2.5 million people were lifted out of poverty, and incomes doubled, employment increased from 70 to 87%. Output per capita increased from 0.366 metric tons to 0.591 metric tons per year, Food security ensured, before the project frequent droughts required occasional government food aid. Now it has changed from a narrow range of food and low-value grain to high value products. Ecological balance restored in a vast area considered to be beyond help by many. Sedimentation of waterways dramatically reduced. Other cites they could use include: Soil erosion was reduced from 6579.55 tons per square kilometer per year to 1986.66 tons.[25], . Conserved 177,000 square kilometers [26]

Corrections I suggested on talk pages before I was blocked - not yet done[edit | hide | edit source]

It is very rare for any other editor to respond to these talk page suggestions to fix an issue - I normally would go back and fix it after the mention but I had a lot on last year, and I have a backlog going back a year of things I never got around to fixing before I was blocked. I edited over 90 articles, most minor fixes without any talk page mention.

Suggested corrections with no response[edit | hide | edit source]

These are relatively minor edits that normally editors would just do on the spot under WP:BOLD. I was super cautious and posted to the talk page first. With no response then the natural thing is to just be bold and make the edit - and if another editor wants to revert or fix what I wrote in some way it is then up to them.

  1. Wikipedia:Talk:Infrared_vision suggestion for new section about animals with infrared vision
  2. Wikipedia:Talk:Copyright_law_of_the_European_Union#Copyright_reform - should say that it has no impact on Wikipedia
  3. Wikipedia:Talk:Apparent_magnitude#Faintest_object_seen_by_hubble 31.5 seems a typo surely is 31.2
  4. Wikipedia:Talk:Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse#Updating_Post-Cold_War_attack_scenarios_section article is out of date
  5. Wikipedia:Talk:Halton_Arp#Doesn't_make_it_clear_it's_an_out_of_date_theory should say theory is out of date
  6. Wikipedia:Talk:Steady_state_model#Olber's_Paradox - should mention the red shift solution to Olber's paradox for the continuously expanding Steady State model.
  7. Wikipedia:Talk:Paleoclimatology#Atmospheric_pressure should mention that earlier atmosphere could have been different in pressure - either lower or higher
  8. Wikipedia:Talk:Google_Translator_Toolkit - should say that adding new translations is no longer supported
  9. Wikipedia:Talk:ISS_ECLSS#Power_requirements - just missing info from article
  10. Wikipedia:Talk:Apollo_Command/Service_Module#Skylab_Apollo_Command_module_half_white_half_unpainted Only half the module was painted white - caption incorrect
  11. Wikipedia:Talk:Circumbinary_planet#Diagram_is_a_bit_misleading - diagram needs edited caption or redone to scale

Other editor reverted edit[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Wikipedia:Talk:WR_104#Not_going_to_hit_Earth_-_pretty_much_certain_now . I added a short sentence summary to the lede of the new tilt measurements mentioned later in the article. Never noticed that another editor corrected my summary to remove mention of the tilt diff. I need to post to the discussion page asking if there is some reason this research shouldn't be mentioned in the lede. Also I have some new cites, see [16] [17].
  2. Perigean spring tide#Confusing first paragraph - this was a mistake on my part and I agree with the correction.

Other editor said to go ahead and do it (but only noticed after block)[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Wikipedia:Talk:Great_Oxygenation_Event#Was_the_great_oxygenation_event_a_mass_extinction? Should mention evidence for a mass extinction is not strong, with cites, similar edit for Wikipedia:Talk:Extinction_event#Was_the_great_oxygenation_event_a_mass_extinction?
  2. Wikipedia:Talk:Goldfish#Perhaps should menion: popular belief that the common goldfish is the only animal_that can see both infrared and ultraviolet light To mention popular belief about goldfish and that it is incorrect, with cites
  3. Wikipedia:Talk:2012_(film)#Most scientifically flawed and absurd science fiction film ever made - I suggested that it should mention that NASA voted it the most scientifically flawed film ever made, in a conference held at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, in 2011 and another editor said to go ahead.

    However, I since found that, though widely publicized at the time the Guardian took down its story after being informed by NASA that they have not been involved in the creation of any such list[27]. So I would post saying sorry I was mistaken.

Mid discussion[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Wikipedia:Talk:Human_overpopulation#Article seems out of date - doesn't mention that population is leveling off naturally as a solution should mention that middle of the range projection of the UN population division is to level off naturally due to prosperity rather than scarcity, and that many countries including Japan already have declining populations. I have many cites we can use for this.[28][29][30][31]
  2. Wikipedia:Talk:Coral_reef#Reefs_in_the_past_doesn't_mention_coral_reefs - my suggestion was unclear partly because of a glitch in the section title - I meant to type "sponge reefs" not "coral reefs". Would post a comment in clarification. Also add that it could cover research into the coral reefs transitioning to sponge reefs in a warming world[32]

References[edit | hide | edit source]

  1. Ortega, Tony (1997-06-26). "The Great UFO Coverup". Phoenix New Times. Retrieved 2008-03-15. 
  2. "In 2018, SB 100 (de León, 2018) was signed into law, which again increases the RPS to 60% by 2030 and requires all state's electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045. SB 100 will take effect on January 1, 2019." [https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/renewables/
  3. UAE's ADNOC says moving ahead with CO2 capture project Abu Dhabi National Oil Company plans to expand the capture, storage and utilisation of carbon dioxide
  4. Haubois, X., Perrin, G., Lacour, S., Verhoelst, T., Meimon, S., Mugnier, L., Thiébaut, E., Berger, J.P., Ridgway, S.T., Monnier, J.D. and Millan-Gabet, R., 2009. Imaging the spotty surface of Betelgeuse in the H band. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 508(2), pp.923-932.
  5. Theil, S., 2015. Why the Human Brain Project Went Wrong—and How to Fix It. Scientific American, 313(4), pp.36-42.
  6. Atlantic ‘conveyor belt’ has slowed by 15% since mid-20th century 11 April 2018
  7. Crossfield, I.J.M., Biller, B., Schlieder, J.E., Deacon, N.R., Bonnefoy, M., Homeier, D., Allard, F., Buenzli, E., Henning, T., Brandner, W. and Goldman, B., 2014. A global cloud map of the nearest known brown dwarf. Nature, 505(7485), p.654.
  8. Parkos, D., Alexeenko, A., Kulakhmetov, M., Johnson, B.C. and Melosh, H.J., 2015. NOx production and rainout from Chicxulub impact ejecta reentry. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 120(12), pp.2152-2168

    "Asteroids striking the Earth typically [Minton and Malhotra, 2010] have an impactor density of 2680 kg/m3and an impact velocity of 20 km/s.Assuming these properties, modern scaling relations indicate that a 10–15 km diameter projectile [Collins et al., 2008] created the 170 km diameter Chicxulub crater"

  9. Report of the Task Force onpotentially hazardous NEAR EARTH OBJECTS
  10. The meteorologist Jeff Haby explains here

    "The dew point is the temperature at which the air is saturated with respect to water vapor over a liquid surface. When the temperature is equal to the dewpoint then the relative humidity is 100%. The common ways for the relative humidity to be 100% is to 1) cool the air to the dewpoint, 2) evaporate moisture into the air until the air is saturated, 3) lift the air until it adiabatically cools to the dew point.
    "The frost point is the temperature at which the air is saturated with respect to water vapor over an ice surface. It is more difficult more water molecules to escape a frozen surface as compared to a liquid surface since an ice has a stronger bonding between neighboring water molecules. Because of this, the frost point is greater in temperature than the dew point. This fact is important to precipitation growth in clouds. Since the vapor pressure is less over an ice surface as compared to a supercooled liquid surface at the same temperature, when the relative humidity is 100% with respect to water vapor the relative humidity over the ice surface will be greater than 100%. Thus, precipitation growth is favored on the ice particles."

  11. "Nuclear winter might give way to a nuclear summer. The high temperatures of the nuclear fireballs could destroy the ozone gas of the middle stratosphere. The result would be an increase in ultraviolet radiation on the surface of the earth, affecting both plant and animal life. "[1]
  12. Review of the Safety of LHC CollisionsLHC Safety Assessment Group, 2011
  13. ]https://public-archive.web.cern.ch/public-archive/downloads/LSAG/LHCaddALICE2011.pdf Implications of LHC heavy ion data for multi-strange baryon production] LHC Safety Assessment GroupSept 26, 2011
  14. Mathew, A. and Nandy, M.K., 2014. General relativistic calculations for white dwarf stars. arXiv preprint arXiv:1401.0819.
  15. Jenniskens, P., Popova, O.P., Glazachev, D.O., Podobnaya, E.D. and Kartashova, A.P., 2019. Tunguska eyewitness accounts, injuries, and casualties. Icarus.
  16. Morrison, D., 2018. Tunguska workshop: applying modern tools to understand the 1908 Tunguska impact.
  17. WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATIONGLOBAL ATMOSPHERE WATCHGAW Report No. 218 Absorption Cross-Sections of Ozone (ACSO)Status Report as of December 2015
  18. Doas-History - Max Planck Institute, Mainz,
  19. Mróz, P., Udalski, A., Skowron, J., Poleski, R., Kozłowski, S., Szymański, M.K., Soszyński, I., Wyrzykowski, Ł., Pietrukowicz, P., Ulaczyk, K. and Skowron, D., 2017. No large population of unbound or wide-orbit Jupiter-mass planets. Nature, 548(7666), p.183.
  20. Charland-Verville, V., Jourdan, J.P., Thonnard, M., Ledoux, D., Donneau, A.F., Quertemont, E. and Laureys, S., 2014. Near-death experiences in non-life-threatening events and coma of different etiologies. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8, p.203.
  21. Elon Musk (28 September 2017), Making Life Multiplanetary | 2017 International Astronautical Congress, retrieved 28 November 2018 

    And the reason that I ended up being the chief engineer or chief designer, was not because I want to, it's because I couldn't hire anyone. Nobody good would join. So I ended up being that by default. And I messed up the first three launches. The first three launches failed. Fortunately the fourth launch which was – that was the last money that we had for Falcon 1 – the fourth launch worked, or that would have been it for SpaceX.

  22. Reported Sighting of Extinct River Dolphin is Unlikely, National Geographic, October 11, 2016
  23. Pellen, M., 2015. Conservation laws for colliding branes with induced gravity. Astrophysics and Space Science, 357(1), p.24.
  24. Restoring China's Loess Plateau, March 15, 2007
  25. Wang, X., Xiao, F., Feng, X., Fu, B., Zhou, Z. and Chan, C., 2018. Soil conservation on the Loess Plateau and the regional effect: impact of the ‘Grain for Green'Project. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, pp.1-11.
  26. Hirshfield, F. and Sui, J., 2011. Changes in sediment transport of the Yellow River in the Loess Plateau. Sediment Transport. InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, pp.197-214.
  27. Nasa names 2012 most absurd science-fiction film of all time

    "This article was taken down on 19 January 2011 after Nasa informed us that the organisation had not been involved in the creation of any list of the least scientifically accurate science-fiction films."

  28. Samir, K.C. and Lutz, W., 2017. The human core of the shared socioeconomic pathways: Population scenarios by age, sex and level of education for all countries to 2100. Global Environmental Change, 42, pp.181-192.
  29. World Population Prospects 2017 online graphs of the World Population Division
  30. World population to keep growing this century, hit 11 billion by 2100, University of Washington news
  31. Gerland, P., Raftery, A.E., Ševčíková, H., Li, N., Gu, D., Spoorenberg, T., Alkema, L., Fosdick, B.K., Chunn, J., Lalic, N. and Bay, G., 2014. World population stabilization unlikely this century. Science, 346(6206), pp.234-237.
  32. Bell, J.J., Davy, S.K., Jones, T., Taylor, M.W. and Webster, N.S., 2013. Could some coral reefs become sponge reefs as our climate changes?. Global change biology, 19(9), pp.2613-2624.