User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia minor fixes examples: Difference between revisions
User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia minor fixes examples (edit)
Revision as of 13:58, 27 May 2019
, 4 years ago→Very minor wikignoming
| (28 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
==Articles to fix==
===Very minor wikignoming===
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinnytsia#cite_ref-11 Vinnytsia - broken link] ▼
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California#cite_note-caiso-5 Energy in California - broken link] fix with [https://web.archive.org/web/20120201001423/http://www.caiso.com/informed/Pages/RenewablesDemandResponseIntegration/default.aspx]
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Lights#Explanations Phoenix Lights#Explanations] Says ''43x magnification.'' - source provided says 60x with no occurrence of number 43 in the story<ref>{{cite news |first= Tony |last= Ortega |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=The Great UFO Coverup |url=http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1997-06-26/news/the-great-ufo-cover-up/ |work= |publisher=[[Phoenix New Times]] |date=1997-06-26 |accessdate=2008-03-15 }}</ref> and there is no discussion of this on the Wikipedia article talk page..▼
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinnytsia#cite_note-10 Vinnytsia - broken link] - just mark it as {{tl|Dead link}} as there is no archived copy
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Madagascar_locust_infestation 2013 Madagscar locust infestation] - not updated since 2013 at the height of the swarm, add cite to FAO [http://www.fao.org/emergencies/crisis/madagascar-locust/intro/en/] and summary of response and outcome in 2014 and 2015.▼
▲# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinnytsia#
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current#Advantages High-voltage direct current#Advantages] for "losses are about 3% per 1,000 km" 3% figure is no longer mentioend in the cited page, or its backup in archive.org[https://web.archive.org/web/20190402151837/https://new.siemens.com/global/en/products/energy/high-voltage/high-voltage-direct-current-transmission-solutions/hvdc-classic.html] - need to replace with this cite:[https://iea-etsap.org/E-TechDS/PDF/E12_el-t&d_KV_Apr2014_GSOK.pdf]▼
▲# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Lights#Explanations Phoenix Lights#Explanations] Says ''43x magnification.'' - seems to be typo, source provided says 60x with no occurrence of number 43 in the story<ref>{{cite news |first= Tony |last= Ortega |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=The Great UFO Coverup |url=http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1997-06-26/news/the-great-ufo-cover-up/ |work= |publisher=[[Phoenix New Times]] |date=1997-06-26 |accessdate=2008-03-15 }}</ref> and there is no discussion of this on the Wikipedia article talk page
# [[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, Error introduced with this diff [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Space_elevator_economics&diff=next&oldid=809771826]▼
▲# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current#Advantages High-voltage direct current#Advantages] for "losses are about 3% per 1,000 km" 3% figure is no longer
▲# [[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
# [[Wikipedia:AT2018cow]] need to correct 29 September to 28 September[http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=12067]
# [[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: [http://pages.astronomy.ua.edu/keel/space/apollo.html]
Line 12 ⟶ 14:
===Article is out of date===
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California#cite_ref-caiso_5-0 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{{refn|"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/}}
#[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage#Abu_Dhabi_%E2%80%93_United_Arab_Emirates 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<ref>[https://www.arabianbusiness.com/energy/408982-uaes-adnoc-says-moving-ahead-with-co2-capture-project 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</ref>
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betelgeuse Betelgeuse] Caption ''highest-resolution image of Betelgeuse available.'' - is about a decade out of date. Higher resolution image from 2009 already in this paper<ref>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. [https://arxiv.org/pdf/0910.4167.pdf Imaging the spotty surface of Betelgeuse in the H band]. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 508(2), pp.923-932.</ref>.
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain_Project Blue Brain Project] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Brain_Project Human Brain Project] Several years out of date. Mainly talks about their optimistic projections in the early days of the project. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain_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 <ref>Theil, S., 2015. [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-human-brain-project-went-wrong-and-how-to-fix-it/ Why the Human Brain Project Went Wrong—and How to Fix It]. Scientific American, 313(4), pp.36-42.</ref>.
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutdown_of_thermohaline_circulation 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 <ref>[https://www.carbonbrief.org/atlantic-conveyor-belt-has-slowed-15-per-cent-since-mid-twentieth-century Atlantic ‘conveyor belt’ has slowed by 15% since mid-20th century] 11 April 2018 </ref>
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China Renewable energy in China] - last updated in 2018 and has note asking to be updated.
▲# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Madagascar_locust_infestation 2013 Madagscar locust infestation] - not updated since 2013 at the height of the swarm, add cite to FAO [http://www.fao.org/emergencies/crisis/madagascar-locust/intro/en/] and summary of response and outcome in 2014 and 2015.
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_Copyright_in_the_Digital_Single_Market 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===
Line 23 ⟶ 29:
Parkos, D., Alexeenko, A., Kulakhmetov, M., Johnson, B.C. and Melosh, H.J., 2015. [https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/2015JE004857 NOx production and rainout from Chicxulub impact ejecta reentry]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 120(12), pp.2152-2168{{quote| ''"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"''}}</ref>
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_impact_avoidance#Deflection_efforts 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'''"''<ref>[http://space.nss.org/media/2000-Report-Of-The-Task-Force-On-Potentially-Hazardous-Near-Earth-Objects-UK.pdf Report of the Task Force onpotentially hazardous NEAR EARTH OBJECTS]</ref> <br />
# [[Wikipedia:2010_AU118]] "''NEODyS lists the nominal 20 October 2020 Earth distance as '''3 AU
# [[Wikipedia:Dew_point]] - says ''"When the temperature is below the freezing point of water, the dew point is called the frost point"'' <br />
# [[Wikipedia:Nuclear_winter#Nuclear_summer]] Cites an article in New Scientist that
===Article is missing information or needs more cites===
Line 47 ⟶ 53:
==Corrections I suggested on talk pages before I was blocked - not yet done==
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===
Line 53 ⟶ 59:
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Infrared_vision]] suggestion for new section about animals with infrared vision
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Copyright_law_of_the_European_Union#Copyright_reform]] - should
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Apparent_magnitude#Faintest_object_seen_by_hubble]] 31.5 seems a typo surely is 31.2
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse#Updating_Post-Cold_War_attack_scenarios_section]] article is out of date
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Halton_Arp#Doesn't_make_it_clear_it's_an_out_of_date_theory]] should say theory is out of date
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Steady_state_model#Olber's_Paradox]] - should mention the
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Paleoclimatology#Atmospheric_pressure]] should mention that earlier atmosphere could have been different in pressure - either lower or higher
# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Google_Translator_Toolkit]] - should say that adding new translations is no longer supported
Line 74 ⟶ 80:
===Other editor said to go ahead and do it (but only noticed after block)===
# [[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▼
# [[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?]]
▲# [[Wikipedia:Talk:Goldfish#
# [[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.<br><br>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<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/jan/05/nasa-2012-flawed-science-fiction Nasa names 2012 most absurd science-fiction film of all time ]{{quote|"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."}}</ref>. So I would post saying sorry I was mistaken.
===Mid discussion
# [[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.<ref>Samir, K.C. and Lutz, W., 2017. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378014001095 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.</ref><ref>[https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/ World Population Prospects 2017] online graphs of the World Population Division</ref><ref>[http://www.washington.edu/news/2014/09/18/world-population-to-keep-growing-this-century-hit-11-billion-by-2100/ World population to keep growing this century, hit 11 billion by 2100], University of Washington news</ref><ref>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. [https://science.sciencemag.org/content/346/6206/234.abstract World population stabilization unlikely this century. Science, 346(6206), pp.234-237].</ref>
# [[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<ref>Bell, J.J., Davy, S.K., Jones, T., Taylor, M.W. and Webster, N.S., 2013. [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.12212 Could some coral reefs become sponge reefs as our climate changes?]. Global change biology, 19(9), pp.2613-2624.</ref>▼
▲# [[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.
==References==
{{Reflist}}
| |||