User talk:Laburke

Woodbury creek

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Woodbury creek, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.gcstormwater.com/maps-woodbury.cfm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 03:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Woodbury Creek (New Jersey)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Woodbury Creek (New Jersey), and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.gcstormwater.com/maps-woodbury.cfm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 03:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Mulliken/Orbital

Hi, I hope it is appropriate to ask you to have a look at the discussion page of the "Molecular orbital" article.

[[1]]

Thanks in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.176.250.16 (talk) 23:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

    It would be more appropriate if you signed your comments and changes. Laburke (talk) 02:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Woodbury Creek

I received your email. I do not operate CorenSearchBot. (In fact, I don't run any bot at all.) Your initial article was flagged by CorenSearchBot for being a copyright violation. I reviewed it and determined that it appeared to be copied from another website, which is not permitted. So I deleted it. It was then recreated, but the entire article was a link to another website. Somebody else revised it but it was deemed by the community to be below the threshold standards for inclusion here, so it was deleted. You are free to recreate the article, as long as you do not copy somebody else's words and give the article some content, e.g., where does it start, where does it end, how long is it, does it flow through any communities, is it navigable, is there a group that maintains or cleans it, does it have particular recreational uses, etc.

Take care and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. -- But|seriously|folks  01:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Flanders

Please take a look at Talk:Flanders#Confusion. I saw that you edited it. I agree that that sentence is a bit confusing, so could you clarify it and/or reference it? And also, in the sentence "In contemporary Belgium, there is pressure to consider Flanders as the 'country of the Flemings' rather than just a region of Belgium." the "pressure" is a bit vague. Thanks, SPQRobin (talk) 18:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Ultima

Excuse me, I understood the source of our disagreement on phrasing in the Ultima (linguistics) article. I did undo too hastily, as you said, without looking at the talk page (as you did not look at it before your recent edit, judging by your edit summary). But I think your phrasing may not be the clearest, since it assumes a way of counting syllables that didn't seem obvious to me at first and might not be obvious to other Wikipedia readers if anyone is like me. That was why I introduced an (alas) less parallelistic phrasing that I hoped would be clearer after I undid your edit. — Eru·tuon 15:04, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Spherical or cartesian coords for wave functions-- it doesn't matter to the graph or most places (just makes the radially symmetric equation easier to solve)

In atomic orbital you've changed nice simple |ψ|s into |ψ(r,θ,φ)|s and I don't see that this helps at all, except to make it uglier and more complicated. After all, these are the very same graphs as if you used (say) |ψ(x,y,z)|s or any other spacial coordinate choice. Why don't you just change them back to the simpler form? Are you trying to show a spacial dependence? Just say they're being graphed in terms of spacial dependence and then you don't confuse the reader (by implication) into thinking that perhaps choice of coordinate systems makes some kind of difference. SBHarris 19:44, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Dear Sb, If you were the one to have submitted the graphics, I apologize in the Greek/Latin sense of apologia. Perhaps it can be left as ψ(x,y,z) so as to not get into too many details, except for the essential and important one. For at least 40 years, I have seen too many students get off on the wrong foot by not noticing that an orbital is a mathematical function that depends on the coordinates of ONE electron. Last night, I put the xyz or r,th,ph into the titles of these excellent graphics to emphasize the one-electron character of orbitals for beginning (and advanced) students in other fields. I thought someone would complain if I didn't put rtp for atoms and xyz for atomic orbitals as starting points for molecular orbitals. (I was even expecting a complaint from someone because cylindrical coordinates are used for diatomics.) No, I didn't want to make explicit reference to cartesian or polar, or cylindrical, or complex, or any other coordinate system. That's too much for a title, and you're right to complain if xyz is in one and rtp in another without explanation in the graphic. I find that many people (including myself) head for the pictures first. That's why I highlighted psi(xyz) and psi(rtp) there for the newbies. Please keep them there somehow. There's so much evne a high school student can learn by graphing one dimensional Ψ(x)=f(x)=y=exp(-Zx^2). BTW, if you or anyone else reading this would like to contact me, please make the effort to go to my talk page, see where I work, go to my web page, and contact me by e-mail. I'd be happy to discuss things that way. (Unless, of course, you are stuck in the mud of Woodbury Creek. I live close enough to throw you a line.) (and I hope you weren't angry enough to resort to the revert button!!!) Laburke (talk) 20:46, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Croconic acid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DFT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Come have a chat.

Why not?  RasputinAXP  20:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Van 't Hoff equation

${\frac {d\ln K}{dT}}={\frac {\Delta H^{\ominus }}{RT^{2}}},$

Are you aware that this equation is true even if $\Delta H$ and $\Delta S$ are functions of temperature? Their net effect is to cancel each other out, so the result is the same as if one were to assume that they are independent of temperature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.184.8 (talk) 18:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Dear Unsigned. After using the equation for over 40 years, I know that it is exact in the limit of dT, that is, when one knows the curvature of deltaH at a particular point T. All Physical Chemistry textbooks explain this, but they assume you know calculus. Some even give ways of estimating deltH at a new T using Kirchoff's Law assuming constant molar C over T. This usually gives a better estimate of a new K instead of using the tabulated deltH value at T=298. After teaching the equation for over 30 years, I have from time to time heard the error that the equation is true because the S and H temperature variation effects cancel each other out. The student also usually thinks that the "standard" in standard deltH means at T=298. The major reason why the equation is so valuable even though deltH can vary ca. 5-10% over deltT=300K is that you are graphing lnK to 1/T, essentially differences in powers of 10 of K to differences in thousandths of 1/T.

Thank you for the clarification, much appreciated. - Unsigned

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Buffering agent may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• concentrations of the weak acid and its salt are equal. If an added strong base halves the [HA] ([HA decreases to [HA]-0.5[HA]), then [A^-] will increase by [A^-]+0.5[A<sup>-</

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2014 (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) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 09:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)