User talk:Guy vandegrift/Archive 16

responded
i responded. maybe you already saw or will see.

https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3ARequests_for_Deletion&type=revision&diff=2457155&oldid=2457149

inner and out peace to you. Michael Ten (discuss • contribs) 09:33, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes I saw. Thanks--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 19:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

It already has its appropriate tags. What more does it need?
Draft:Free Energy does not Exist already has its appropriate tags. What more does it need? I don't understand. Honestly, the tags are appropriate for they accurately describe the situation to any casual visitor who might arrive for the first time. I don't get what your goal is. Could you please explain it to me? I'm definitely too close to my work to be able to guess at people's motives unless they're explicit about them. Thank you. -- Vinyasi (discuss • contribs) 02:51, 14 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I have no motive other than improving the reputation of Wikiversity. Wikipedia declares this definition of Free Energy to be Pseudoscience.  Pseudoscience is an appropriate topic for Wikiversity, but only if it is abundantly clear at the top of this article that it is pseudoscience.  If you agree that it is pseudoscience, then write a coherent lead paragraph to that effect.  If you do not agree that this "electronic" free energy does not exist, then that question needs to be debated on Draft talk:Free Energy does not Exist


 * I guess what really bothered me was that the Google key words free energy wikiversity listed "Free Energy does not Exist" at the top of the page.


 * Do either of you object if we sort this one out on Draft talk:Free Energy does not Exist?--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 03:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. It is copied there. -- Vinyasi (discuss • contribs) 03:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hydrogen system
Dear Guy vandegrift, on December 25, 2022 You renamed the Hydrogen system page to Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system page without leaving the redirect to new page. But in Wikiversity there ase some pages with links to Hydrogen system page, such as

Stellar constants, Quantization of parameters of cosmic systems, Stellar Dirac constant, SPФ symmetry, Coupling constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Fine structure constant, Stellar Boltzmann constant, Stellar Planck constant, Substantial electron model, Strong gravitation, Strong gravitational constant, Stellar Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Selfconsistent gravitational constants, Scale dimension, Electrogravitational vacuum.

It seems the Hydrogen system is useful notation. In view of this can you reconsider your decision and cancel the renaming of the Hydrogen system page? Fedosin (discuss • contribs) 06:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia has declared this to be fringe science. I am not an expert in this field and have no choice but to follow Wikipedia Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 11:47, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

--
 * Dear Guy vandegrift,

it is wonderful that you renamed pages and removed them without any discussion on the question. Why do not you use special instruments in Wikiversity such as templates for similar actions, where everyone can take part in talks and vote any opinion?

I add also what is important in the case:

Some years ago, at Wikiversity there was great discussion about ways of development of Wikiversity. One of the questions was the next: Is it possible to use at Wikiversity a page that was abandoned at Wikipedia?

The answer was: Yes.

The reasons for such answer are: 1) Wikiversity is not the Wikipedia. 2) Wikiversity has its own internal policy. 3) All pages which useful for creative thinking and which summarize some research fields are welcome and should be developed in the best possible way. 4). Fringe science do not allow in Wikipedia, mostly due to of absence of reliable references. In Wikiversity the rules are not so strict, since Wikiversity is educational project and it is not encyclopedia. Sometimes fringe science today become advanced science in the future. The Wikiversity can help in the process of such transformation of fringe science. Fedosin (discuss • contribs) 11:13, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Similarity of matter levels
Dear Guy vandegrift, on December 25, 2022 You renamed the Similarity of matter levels page to Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Similarity of matter levels page without leaving the redirect to new page. But in Wikiversity there ase some pages with links to Similarity of matter levels page, such as

Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter, SPФ symmetry, Stellar Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Stellar Dirac constant, Substantial neutron model, Scale dimension, Gravitational constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Praon, Stellar Boltzmann constant, Nuon, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Discreteness of stellar parameters, Substantial electron model, Electrogravitational vacuum, Quantization of parameters of cosmic systems, Stellar constants, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system, Substantial proton model, Coupling constant, Stellar Planck constant, Strong gravitation, Model of quark quasiparticles, Characteristic speed, Substantial photon model, Strong gravitational constant, Gravitational model of strong interaction, Covariant theory of gravitation, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Monopoles, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Velocity circulation quantum, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Gravitoelectromagnetism, Field mass-energy limit, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Quantum Gravitational Resonator.

I believe Similarity of matter levels is important concept in our knowledge of Universe. In view of this can you reconsider your decision and cancel the renaming of the Hydrogen system page? Fedosin (discuss • contribs) 10:22, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I can't do that because it is the opinion of Wikipedia that Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Similarity of matter levels is fringe science.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 11:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

--
 * Dear Guy vandegrift,

You are not in Wikipedia, you are in Wikiversity and renamed the pages, which were created by other peoples. But the right for the action has only custodian of Wikiversity using a procedure for such case. See also my answer at page Hydrogen system. Fedosin (discuss • contribs) 11:32, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

-

Conclusion
I will return Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system back to Hydrogen system and place the page up for deletion on Requests for deletion--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 13:36, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

About your message and the draftifications
I have read the message you placed on my talk page.

I would be grateful if you would immediately move back to the mainspace all pages, created by editors other than yourself, which you have draftified without consensus and without discussion. That includes, in particular, all of the pages that were created by me. It also includes any such pages created by someone other than me. I would be grateful if you would permanently refrain from draftifying pages without first seeking and obtaining community consensus for such draftification in an appropriate community discussion. James500 (discuss • contribs) 02:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Universal Bibliography
I have read the message you placed on my talk page.

I cannot expand or improve the bibliography while it is under threat of draftification. I cannot take the risk of putting large amounts of time and energy into making improvements to a bibliography that subsequently gets draftified. If you want me to make, or if anyone else wants me to make, improvements to the bibliography, you need to give me specific instructions as to exactly what improvements will bring the risk of draftification completely and permanently to an end. James500 (discuss • contribs) 02:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Those instructions won't come from me -- I just flagged the resource for being so large that a decision needs to be made now, before it gets too large to be easily moved. If nobody want's it moved out of mainspace, it will stay there. I personally don't have a problem with the resource. --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 04:29, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Try out my Lilypond

 * produce

See de:b:Kategorie:Seiten, die Score verwenden Letter "L" = Liederbuch = Songbook. Not every songs are made in an optimised Lilypond-code, but maby you'll find some usfull stuff. Greetings from the German Wikibooks -- Mjchael (discuss • contribs) 01:03, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * That was amazing! To my untrained ear, your accompaniment is perfect. When I finish my Beat (acoustics) I will look at your other scores.  I would like to turn songs into practice sessions by writing the pieces in about 3 keys and breaking them up for repetitive  practice.  Also I would like to offer the chords with and without the melody in order to give the singer confidence that he/she can sing solo.  I can write python codes to modify all the codes, but without a good accompaniment I have little chance of producing anything useful.  I studied German in college, but after learning Russian I speak that language every time I try to speak German.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Also, it looks like you are doing top-quality work. It would take me a bit of time to tool up my Python skills, but if you can think of a task that can be automated, I can write Python code to that would make it easy to create multiple versions of whatever you need:  For example, I could write a code that transposes a collection of songs into different tempos or keys.  Let me know if you are interested.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 01:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Strong gravitational constant
Could you please review Strong gravitational constant. I noticed Fedosin had redirected Hydrogen system to his essay. I removed that redirect and I'm cleaning up other redirects. But this particular article has a significant amount of Fedosin-related content. Without knowing the subject matter, I am inclined to remove anything Fedosin-related because I don't have any way to verify its validity. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I see no pedagogical or scientific value in Strong gravitational constant. I spent a couple of hours trying to sort out the work of Fedosin and came to the conclusion that anything he writes that has value is also is accompanied by a great deal of fringe research.  Wikipedia has the same opinion.  See, for example, Articles_for_deletion/Strong_gravitational_constant_(2nd_nomination) and also my (collapsed) comments at Requests_for_Deletion.  One of my observations from looking into this is that just about anything can now get published in some obscure journal on theoretical physics. I support the moving of Strong gravitational constant into a subpage of Physics/Essays on the grounds that even if it is true, it should not be part of a student's education in physics because it detracts from the non-fringe materials that a physicist is expected to know. Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 21:25, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Pagemoves
creates

creates