User contributions for 98.226.86.66

21:0421:04, 22 March 2025 diff hist +61 Genius of the Species Noting this is all a WP editor creation, without any reference to source (not even a traceable citation to the published book about which the article is written).
20:5920:59, 22 March 2025 diff hist +592 Reginald Bretnor →Papa Schimmelhorn series: Adding citations for the Gnurrs story.
20:4720:47, 22 March 2025 diff hist +495 Reginald Bretnor Added the Flaxman biographical essat to Further reading. Not the best, but better than the nothing that routinely is cited throughout.
20:4520:45, 22 March 2025 diff hist +573 Reginald Bretnor Added a Further reading section, and a first additional resource to address the backlog of unsourced content.
20:3420:34, 22 March 2025 diff hist +52 Reginald Bretnor Added a citation in support of the Moncrif translation, and removed a {{cn}} tag.
20:3120:31, 22 March 2025 diff hist +6,697 Reginald Bretnor NOTE, NO UNSOURCED MATERIAL ADDED—work was structural: added std sections, moved existing content about (eg, moved marital sentences to new Personal life section). Edited to remove repetition. NOTED WP:VERIFY VIOLATIONS. Called for populating new sections with verifiable content. Marked LaVey sentence dubious (single source, promotional, see in-text note). Hid unsourced feline psychic connection sentence (!). Likewise, hid 2 survivalism "See also" entries—only 1 related sentence, it unsourced.
19:5519:55, 22 March 2025 diff hist +25 History of Vladivostok →{{anchor|Influences}}Chinese influence: This is is appalling. Whole sections violating WP:VERIFY?
19:5419:54, 22 March 2025 diff hist −25 Vladivostok →Foundation: Examined a May 2024 claim, sentence dubious. The citations appearing are valid, and are from very reputable scholars. If the stated fact itself fails verification, that's different (requires a different tag and bold edit). If disagreeing with the scholars—if truly dubious—insert a sentence based likewise on valid scholarly sources, stating so. Otherwise, WP editors shouldn't editorialise, casting shade over published, valid, scholarly author perspective by adding a dubious tag.
01:1601:16, 22 March 2025 diff hist +14 Potential gradient The breadth-in-scope (and number as well) of citations appearing here—esp. relative to the number of purported factual assertions—is appalling in this article. WP:VERIFY failures abound. {{refimprove}} tag placed.
01:1301:13, 22 March 2025 diff hist +644 Potential gradient →Biology: For goodness sake, all life exists because of the existence of potential gradients in living systems (and their physicochemical origins). Please either eliminate this errant content or provide an authoritative source-derived definition, explanation of this subject. Any undergrad/grad physiology text will provide a start. And don't again limit the discussion to the "cell membrane". (Alongside the detailed, if under-sourced physics description, this section pales to transparent.)
00:5600:56, 22 March 2025 diff hist +12 Osmotic pressure Adding an adjective to precede equilibrium, to justify the redirect here from search for "Osmotic equilibrium", and thus to allow a link to this article by one wikilinking that term.
00:4800:48, 22 March 2025 diff hist +24 Osmotic pressure No such defining statement, "tendency of a solution to take in its pure solvent by osmosis" appears in main body, and support by citation appears nowhere, and so this violates WP:VERIFY and WP:INTRO.
00:3600:36, 22 March 2025 diff hist +25 Sedimentation equilibrium →Ultracentrifuge: Great idea to include this important content, non-compliant to write the section from personal knowledge. This section must be one or more of the following: a violation of WP:OR, a violation of WP:VERIFY, and/or plagiarism.
00:2700:27, 22 March 2025 diff hist +284 User talk:Binksternet →Please look in at...: Reply Tag: Reply
00:2500:25, 22 March 2025 diff hist +137 Negative feedback Article a a whole has paragraph after paragraph of unsourced content, in violation of WP:VERIFY. See for instance, the following sections: General description, Examples, Areas of Application, etc. See also subsections: Advantages of amplifier negative voltage feedback, Operational amplifier circuits, etc.
00:2100:21, 22 March 2025 diff hist +345 Negative feedback →Negative feedback amplifier: Made subheading syntax WP MOS compliant, and copy edited same subsection for subject-verb agreement. Noted further unsourced content.
00:1000:10, 22 March 2025 diff hist +22 Negative feedback →Examples: Noting that the Examples section is entirely unsourced, and therefore violates WP:VERIFY (and, given the degree of specificity of the content appearing, all but certainly involves plagiarism). We leave to a continuing logging editor decisions about bold edits.
00:0500:05, 22 March 2025 diff hist +718 User talk:रोहित साव27 →New article request removal current

23:5623:56, 21 March 2025 diff hist +50 User talk:Em3rgent0rdr →Please look in at... current
23:5623:56, 21 March 2025 diff hist +50 User talk:RCraig09 →Please look in at...
23:5523:55, 21 March 2025 diff hist +50 User talk:MaxwellMolecule →Please look in at...
23:5423:54, 21 March 2025 diff hist +1,090 User talk:Binksternet →Please look in at...: new section Tag: New topic
23:4823:48, 21 March 2025 diff hist +1,040 User talk:MaxwellMolecule →Please look in at...: new section Tag: New topic
23:4623:46, 21 March 2025 diff hist +1,041 User talk:Em3rgent0rdr →Please look in at...: new section Tag: New topic
23:4423:44, 21 March 2025 diff hist +1,040 User talk:RCraig09 →Please look in at...: new section Tag: New topic
23:3523:35, 21 March 2025 diff hist −121 Negative feedback This edit returns the "Short description" posted by User:Constant314, after reverting the earlier, misguided reversion, that added back unsourced material violating WP:INTRO and WP:VERIFY.
23:3323:33, 21 March 2025 diff hist +493 Negative feedback Undid revision 1281696273 by रोहित साव27 (talk) PLEASE CAREFULLY REVIEW YOUR REVERSION. THE EDIT YOU REVERTED WAS ITSELF A REVERSION OF AN EARLIER EDIT BY A NOW-BLOCKED EDITOR. **THE MATERIAL WE REMOVED WAS UNSOURCED.** THAT IS, YOUR REVERSION ACCOMPLISHED THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF YOUR STATED INTENT—YOU, IN FACT, RETURNED UNSOURCED MATERIAL VIOLATING WP:VERIFY (AS OUR EDIT SUMMARY CLEARLY STATES). Tag: Undo
23:3223:32, 21 March 2025 diff hist +22 Negative feedback Undid revision 1281699264 by Constant314 (talk) TEMPORARY REVERSION, WILL RETURN SHORT DESCRIPTION EDIT MOMENTARILY. PLEASE STAND BY. Tag: Undo
23:3023:30, 21 March 2025 diff hist +252 User talk:Constant314 →I will re-add: new section Tag: New topic
23:2323:23, 21 March 2025 diff hist +806 User talk:Em3rgent0rdr →Just FYI, so you hear, rather than stumbling on the matter: new section Tag: New topic
23:0123:01, 21 March 2025 diff hist +244 Negative feedback Hid from view for other registered editors to review/permanently rectify—recently added, large lead text blocks fr. blocked editor that (i) lack corresponding text in main body, and (ii) cite no sources. As such, what's hidden violates WP:INTRO, WP:VERIFY. We'd ∴ argue rectifying requires editor research to attribute and edit-to-source, effort reproducing source-derived edit in main body, then summation in lead (i.e., significant editor hard work), or alternatively, deletion for its violations. Tag: Reverted
22:3822:38, 21 March 2025 diff hist +131 Negative feedback Hid from view for other registered editors to review/permanently rectify—a recently added, unsourced statement, (i) that doesn't have corresponding text in main body, and (ii) that cites no source. As such, what is hidden violates WP:INTRO and WP:VERIFY; and, we'd argue, it requires research by an editor to attribute it, and effort to reproduce the source-derived work in the main body, for summation in lead (i.e., significant editor hard work), or alternatively, deletion for its violations. Tag: Reverted
22:1222:12, 21 March 2025 diff hist +118 Negative feedback →General description: The section repeatedly presents non-sky-is-blue concepts without attribution, essentially in violation of WP:VERIFY and WP:OR. The veracity of WP information, per our disclaimer and other core policies and guidelines, is in the tie between our content and its sources. Tag: Reverted
21:5921:59, 21 March 2025 diff hist +193 Homeostasis Noting that the lead does not adequately summarise the article, likely contains unique content, and emphasizes an individual system out of proportion to coverage of it and other systems in the article. (We imagine an entire paragraph of individual interest on cannabinoids/endocannabinoids was added late to the lead, without proper scrutiny for article and lead scope/balance.)
21:3421:34, 21 March 2025 diff hist −5 List of types of equilibrium Adjustment regarding "Equilibrium figure" entry: Removed as WP:OR (edit begun earlier, finished now). Earlier, entry appeared: [ [ Hydrostatic equilibrium | Equilibrium figure ] ]… Since: (1) There is no such [ [ Equilibrium figure ] ] article, (2) TERM DOESN'T APPEAR in the wikilinked Hydrostatic equilibrium article, and (3) separate wikilink to that existing article ALREADY APPEARS in this list. So, like deleting red Comfortable equilibrium, this resolves WP:OR, WP:VERIFY violations.
17:3717:37, 21 March 2025 diff hist +73 List of types of equilibrium →Biology: In-text note, to make clear that, for Homeostasis", the term "equilibrium" occurs in the linked article's lead.
17:3517:35, 21 March 2025 diff hist +40 List of types of equilibrium Clarification, to encompass the "eaquilibrio-" prefix.
17:3417:34, 21 March 2025 diff hist +40 List of types of equilibrium Copy edits, to make style and format of the maths section more consistent. Will return to begin checking definition phrasing against linked article leads.
17:2517:25, 21 March 2025 diff hist +4,015 List of types of equilibrium Article functions as disambiguation page, so should be transferred to that format. Until done, doesn't need citations—list's basis is now clear in lead. Exceptions: 1, a single entry's now hidden from view (Comfortable...), as it violates WP:OR, WP:VERIFY (no WP article, no citation); 2, some earlier details now hidden (names), as seemed too detailed for disambiguation page. (As issue's resolved, article tag indicating sourcing issue is removed—despite no citations; issue otherwise resolved).
15:5415:54, 21 March 2025 diff hist +68 Isotope fractionation Added information to the USGS citation.
15:1115:11, 21 March 2025 diff hist +118 Isotope fractionation →Example: The entirety of the text that appeared earlier, that we had edited, was plagiarised. We are returning the text to that form, and adding quotation marks, so there is a record of that. We will follow this with an edit to paraphrase, but we wanted there to be a record of the earlier sloppy/dishonest cribbing that had taken place.
15:0415:04, 21 March 2025 diff hist −389 Isotope fractionation Undid revision 1281632661 by 98.226.86.66 (talk) Reverting our own edit, because we discovered a plagiarism issue, and we wish to address that. Tag: Undo
15:0215:02, 21 March 2025 diff hist +389 Isotope fractionation →Example: Made clear this should be one of several examples, and edited the prose for comprehensibility. Tag: Reverted

21:5321:53, 20 March 2025 diff hist +219 Isotope fractionation →Types: WIkilinks are not citations, and to not add to this article, which needs to present and define concepts, and state sources for that information.
21:4921:49, 20 March 2025 diff hist +235 Isotope fractionation Adding analytical methods to the list, with citations.
21:3821:38, 20 March 2025 diff hist +2,005 Isotope fractionation Added other fields where fractionation is studied, with citations, and because the new citations are not fully utilised, added them to further reading for other editors to review. Did first pass copy editing to make the citations appear more uniform. But they still need to be made complete, and transferred to {{cite book... or related templates. Tag: Disambiguation links added
21:2121:21, 20 March 2025 diff hist +23 Isotopic analysis by nuclear magnetic resonance →Authenticity of wines: Copy edit (removed extraneous space, added punctuation), and called for a citation to support the update assertion (which isn't from 1991 citation). REGARDING TITLE CHANGE / ARTiCLE MOVE: The related isotope fractionation article is the only article we've identified as a possible recipient of general, non-SNIF content on instrumental determination of isotopic abundance. Adding new MS, NMR sections there, and interlinking with new SNIF article may be the answer.
21:1221:12, 20 March 2025 diff hist +5 Isotope fractionation →Literature: Change to a more standard section title.
21:1021:10, 20 March 2025 diff hist −1 Isotopic analysis by nuclear magnetic resonance →Organisational recognition: Copy edit, removed stray, extraneous character. Note, it appears that article title derives after creation by translation of the French WIkipedia article—see fr:Analyse isotopique par résonance magnétique nucléaire—and that such is source of errant article title and/or narrowness of article scope. Our thought: ARTICLE SHOULD NE RENAMED, "Site-specific natural isotopic fractionation nuclear magnetic resonance (SNIF-NMR)", see next edit as well.
21:0121:01, 20 March 2025 diff hist +87 Isotopic analysis by nuclear magnetic resonance →13C-SNIF-NMR: Removed a further spurious Figure no., and made the legend, which introduces undefined abbreviations, clear for readers. Noted this section lacks any secondary or tertiary sources. It also should be expanded—last citation is for work prior to 2010—and copyedited. [See the opening sentences for poor, machine translation, or otherwise derived issues.]

22 March 2025

21 March 2025

20 March 2025