Robertinventor/Wikipedia mistakes or omissions
From Doomsday debunked
As I browse I notice mistakes and omissions in Wikipedia. Normally I'd just fix them or add a note to the talk page. Can't any more, since I'm indef blocked. But I might as well take a note of them in case I ever am unblocked. I can appeal six months from now but don't currently plan to do so. It's a lot of fuss, unlikely to succeed, and though I'd like to continue to help with the project, if they don't want me, it gives me more time for other things.
The list since I was blocked includes minor fixes I would normally do without first mentioning on the talk page.
It's also useful as it gives an idea of how many mistakes one notices while browsing Wikipedia if you are a regular user who also checks the information you find there - usually I notice several mistakes a week, most minor, but occasional major bloopers.
This doesn't include the errors in the astrobiology, Buddhism, and microtonal music topic areas - too numerous to list individually. I commented about a few of the microtonal pages needing fixed in the microtonal project proposal before I was blocked.
- 1 Noticed after I was blocked
- 2 Corrections I suggested on talk pages before I was blocked - not yet done
- 2.1 Suggested corrections with no response
- 2.2 Implemented fixes after talk page mention
- 2.3 Other editor implemented suggested fix
- 2.4 Other editor thinks shouldn't do edit
- 2.5 Other editor reverted edit
- 2.6 Other editor said to go ahead and do it (but only noticed after block)
- 2.7 Discussed to some extent, no conclusion about what to do, would need to resume discussion or start new thread
Noticed after I was blocked[edit | edit source]
Would post to talk page first[edit | edit source]
- Asteroid_impact_avoidance#Deflection_efforts says "in addition, the warning time is unlikely to be more than a few months", misparaphrases source, the source used says "warning period for a potential impact from a long period comet may be as short as a year" so a year as likely shortest warning period, not a few months as likely longest - and that is from 2008, warning periods increased since then.
- Ozone#Physical properties - Colour of ozone - only one cite and minimal info. For better cites and much more info see my What is the colour of ozone
- Cites Kos Telegram - it's a fake news site. Would post to talk page to alert people that it uses a fake site as a source.
- Wikipedia:Gamma-ray_burst#GRB_candidates_in_the_Milky_Way "Knowledge of GRBs, however, is from metal-poor galaxies of former epochs of the universe's evolution, and it is impossible to directly extrapolate to encompass more evolved galaxies and stellar environments with a higher metallicity, such as the Milky Way." - This is about a decade out of date. The closest gamma ray burst observed was 140 million light years away, not the billions of light years away implied by "former epoch".
- Wikipedia:Kevin_Anderson_(scientist) A bit out of date, more recent paper on his current views: 
- Wikipedia:Dew_point - says "When the temperature is below the freezing point of water, the dew point is called the frost point, as frost is formed rather than dew" - not correct, frost point and dew point can sometimes differ
- Wikipedia:History_of_SpaceX doesn't mention the first three rocket failures
- Wikipedia:Lunar_theory Doesn't talk about variation in ellipticity of the lunar orbit
- Wikipedia:2010_AU118 NEODyS lists the nominal 20 October 2020 Earth distance as 3 AU (450,000,000 km; 280,000,000 mi).
- seems strange
- Wikipedia:Nuclear_winter#Nuclear_summer Doesn't seem well sourced. Cites an article in New Scientist that doesn't seem to exist.  and another online post from 2002 that just talks about increased UV not warming 
- Wikipedia:Copernicus_(lunar_crater) - should say something about impactor studies Formd as a result of an impactor perhaps about 7 km in diameter 
Minor, would have just fixed on the spot[edit | edit source]
- High-voltage direct current#Advantages for "±800 kV line voltage, losses are about 3% per 1,000 km"  - cite for article no longer works, page has nothing about it (could also try archi8ve.org).
- Wikipedia:Space_elevator_economics#Total_cost_of_a_privately_funded_Edwards'_Space_Elevator - the cite says total cost $20 billion for first 10 years operation, or $40 billion with 100% contingency, not $6 billion, error introduced with this diff 
- Wikipedia:AT2018cow "As of 29 September 2018, AT2018cow has been explained in various ways, including as a type Ic supernova, a gamma-ray burst, an interaction between a white dwarf and black hole, and as a magnetar. " which correctly summarizes their source, except the source is dated 28th September. Minor error. 
- 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. for: 
Corrections I suggested on talk pages before I was blocked - not yet done[edit | 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.
Suggested corrections with no response[edit | edit source]
- Wikipedia:Talk:Infrared_vision suggestion for new section about animals with infrared vision
- Wikipedia:Talk:Copyright_law_of_the_European_Union#Copyright_reform - should mention impact on Wikipedia
- 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 historical solution to Olber's paradox for the Steady State model.
- 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
- Wikipedia:Talk:ISS_ECLSS#Power_requirements - just missing info from article
- Wikipedia:Talk:Apollo_Command/Service_Module#Skylab_Apollo_Command_module_half_white_half_unpainted Only half the module was painted white - caption incorrect
- Wikipedia:Talk:Circumbinary_planet#Diagram_is_a_bit_misleading - diagram needs edited caption or redone to scale
Implemented fixes after talk page mention[edit | edit source]
Other editor implemented suggested fix[edit | edit source]
Other editor thinks shouldn't do edit[edit | edit source]
- Wikipedia:Talk:Clathrate_gun_hypothesis - many mistakes in this article - but to fix them would be a major edit and the editor who made the mistakes does not accept that they are errors.
Other editor reverted edit[edit | edit source]
- Wikipedia:Talk:WR_104#Not_going_to_hit_Earth_-_pretty_much_certain_now - later in the page they link to the Universe Today article "WR 104 Won't Kill Us After All" and summarize it accurately. I added a short sentence summary to the lede. Never noticed that another editor removed my summary 'correcting' it from "However spectroscopic observations now strongly suggest that it is tilted at an angle of 30°-40° and so any gamma ray burst can't hit us" to "Scientists currently believe the odds of WR 104 posing a risk to be small" based on this article 
Other editor said to go ahead and do it (but only noticed after block)[edit | edit source]
- 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
- Wikipedia:Talk:Great_Oxygenation_Event#Was_the_great_oxygenation_event_a_mass_extinction? Should mention evidence for a mass extinction is not strong and also Wikipedia:Talk:Extinction_event#Was_the_great_oxygenation_event_a_mass_extinction?
Discussed to some extent, no conclusion about what to do, would need to resume discussion or start new thread[edit | edit source]
- 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 is to level off naturally and (if we can find sources) should also have criticism of idea that space settlement can solve exponential population growth - it can't do that indefinitely, just delay the problems.
- Wikipedia:Talk:KIC_8462852#January_3_paper_in_AJ_Letters suggested extra para in lede about latest research