I've declared myself as a "connected contributor" in the ITT article (because I was a researcher ... middle-manager in 1970-1980).

I have been accused of being a single-purpose editor (I have actually contributed to 166 articles) and of being involved off-wiki with promoting Cold Fusion and/or Rossi's Energy Catalyzer. I have not worked for, or benefited financially from any organization in these fields, and thus do not need to declare myself a "connected contributor". I have ANALYZED the E-Cat extensively, and am personally convinced that it is real, even though it may not have risen to the level of "scientific proof".

User:Alanf777/draft cricket Alanf777 (talk) 22:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done! Useful and balanced information, but somehow, I'm not quite sure that Taitz was expecting something like that! Ravensfire (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that she NEVER gets what she wants. Alanf777 (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your draft. Looks pretty good, but I've got some thoughts on it that I don't have the time to put down right now, but didn't want you to think I was ignoring your work. I'll put something up this evening! Ravensfire (talk) 22:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alanf777, Related to your recent edits on John McCarthy (computer scientist)‎: we need first reliable references describing his dead, before we can accept changes in this sense. I hope you understand that we need to be careful before we declare somebody dead on Wikipedia. Thanks, SchreyP ^(messages) 18:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine ... Alanf777 (talk) 20:05, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a reliable reference. If you can publish somewhere (on your blog?) the communication you got from John's sister, I could add it as an additional reference. I'm very sorry if you were a friend of John's. Kragen Javier Sitaker (talk) 21:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it was on a subscription-only site, so it can't be referenced. (And I only know his sister, never met him.) Alanf777 (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I misconstrued the relationship of the person from whom I heard the news .. it's a daughter, not sister (she describes herself as "the sister of AI" ... and I misapplied the "sister of" to her father. )

maybe you can have a look at my list. Feel free to edit --POVbrigand (talk) 21:39, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!!

I could post it a vortex -- but why don't you come over : it's a mix of believers and extreme skeptics. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/info.html to subscribe, then you can click thread/date for web version. Submissions are by email. Alanf777 (talk) 22:01, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot join everywhere. I am lurking on vortex, don't worry. You can report my list on vortex, I would appreciate some help. --POVbrigand (talk) 22:39, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know about this book COLD FUSION The history of research in Italy ? Lots of information. --POVbrigand (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links ... I'll put your list up on vortex next week. Alanf777 (talk) 19:25, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's good - I feel better already :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.137.128 (talk) 23:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made several changes to ITT Corporation, Harold Geneen and Rand Araskog

The safety test is under directive 42, not 32. You have mixed them up. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm editing Eighth Step Coffee House -- and see that you (User:FoCuSandLeArN) suggested some changes. I added some REF's and a REFLIST -- but it seems to be broken!!! I'd be grateful if you could fix it. (And tell me what I did wrong so I can avoid it in the future). Alanf777 (talk) 23:04, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had a slash vs backslash -- a passer-by fixed it Alanf777 (talk) 01:27, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alanf777. You say on your user page that you are testing contributions to various articles. You should use your sandbox for that (there should be a link for it near your user name). Your user page should be about you as an editor. Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 04:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I needed to clear my sandbox for re-organizing an entire article. I've moved (almost) everything to my sandbox, except for some stuff where I'm soliciting comments before incorporating it in an article. Alanf777 (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. If you are working on multiple articles, another thing you may be interested to try are subpages. You can just create a subpage for each article you are working on. Just be careful not to add sub-page drafts to live categories because the categories should only contain "published" articles in the mainspace. Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 03:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make this entirely clear: if you misrepresent a source again by selective quotation, in the way you have done here [1], I shall have no hesitation in reporting you, and calling for you to be topic-banned per Wikipedia:general sanctions. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:52, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. I expanded the quote to remove the "selective quotation" Alanf777 (talk) 03:09, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Well done For your efforts
	Dear Alanf777. Here's another reputable journal reference you can use to edit the Energy Catalyzer page: http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/interest-in-lenr-device-resurges-as-independent-report-is-released-2013-06-07 Brandon Hurd (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am having trouble understanding the differing opinions you express here and here. It conveys the impression, when viewed with the rest of your edits, that you are attached to a particular point of view in a manner independent of the evidence. If this level of emotional involvement is such that you cannot dispassionately contribute to a discussion, then you should recuse yourself from the discussion. Thanks for your consideration. VQuakr (talk) 01:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Selborne College, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patrick Miller (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) 11:18, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Energy Catalyzer shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Binksternet (talk) 03:43, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cache Creek (Sacramento River), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Long Valley and Rumsey (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) 08:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Cache Creek (Sacramento River) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Lake County, Central Valley and Capay

California State Route 16 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Central Valley

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lake County, California, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Clear Lake and Ukiah (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) 08:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk: Cold fusion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Robert McClenon (talk) 21:18, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I bring to your attention for discussion the aspects mentioned on user talk:Kirk shanahan. How do you consider these aspects and proposals?--188.27.144.144 (talk) 12:33, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care what users do on their own pages. Alanf777 (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

....... 188.27.144.144 (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, wiki user pages are not a forum for discussion. I participate most regularly on the vortex mailing list. Alanf777 (talk) 19:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had the impression that wikiarticle talk page are the most strict re forum aspect and not user pages. However, I should underline that the aspects suggested by me (on your talk page) have been proposed for analysis in order to be clarified for potential inclusion in article. (I also need to specify that I'm less to at all familiar with vortex mailing list).--188.27.144.144 (talk) 12:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I've noticed your latest posting to CF talk involving, among others, ENEA. I want to ask whether you have any (personal) connection to ENEA Frascatti.--82.137.11.180 (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, none at all. Alanf777 (talk) 00:16, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alanf777. Can you get in touch with me please to co-ordinate trying to fix the Energy Catalyzer article. Regards, Brandon Hurd. Contact me at: brandonDOThurdATgmailDOTcom Brandon_hurd (talk) 12:54, 10 Decemmber 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.236.82.16 (talk)

You already have the discretionary sanctions notice. This covers cold fusion broadly construed, i.e. it includes the e-cat. As a single-purpose editor involved off-wiki with promoting these devices, you should restrict yourself to proposing specific changes on the Talk pages or you may be topic-banned. Guy (Help!) 16:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SINGLE PURPOSE !!?? I think I have contributed to over 100 wiki articles. My best are major changes to Learning Curve and a whole section on Cricket. Alanf777 (talk) 17:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket#Format_of_the_game Alanf777 (talk) 17:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Alanf777&project=en.wikipedia.org

Unique pages edited: 166 <============= SINGLE PURPOSE !!??

 Alanf777 (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alanf777! I've noticed that you contributed to talk:calorimetry by proposing something. I think your input could be useful to the newest proposed additions on that talk page and other talk pages like those associated to standard enthalpy of formation and Hess's law about the heat of neutron capture and emission reactions.--5.2.200.163 (talk) 17:41, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alanf777. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The method for proper talk page indentation is described at WP:INDENT and WP:INTERSPERSE. For replies there should be a single additional colon. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 17:14, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phys.org is almost entirely churnalism. Please don't use it and please don't restore it. It was excess in any case in Energy Catlalyzer article, so i removed the ref I replaced it with -- which is the source that phys.org itself had lightly edited and republished. They cited it at the bottom of their piece. This is what they do. We mislead readers when we give them phys.org as some kind of actual independent source they can learn from - almost every thing they publish is derivative of press releases or other people's work and we should always just cite the underlying work instead of it. At some point I am going to start an RfC about this along the lines of the Daily Mail RfC. Jytdog (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2017 (UTC) (strike incorrect Jytdog (talk) 18:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I'm not going to defend phys.org .. but I visit it daily. However, we can NOT quote a NON-reliable source directly. We can only do that if a RS comments on a non-RS : in that case we can (probably) include a secondary link to the NON-RS. Alanf777 (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I took out the underlying source i added - it was redundant in any case. I cannot wrap my head around why anyone would voluntarily spend time reading press releases, but that is a different topic. Jytdog (talk) 16:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss on the EC talk page. Alanf777 (talk) 16:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

there is only an issue if you are going to argue that we keep phys.org - since all it does is churn an underlying unreliable source you have no argument to make, but i will look and see. Jytdog (talk) 16:47, 8 August 2017 (UTC) (strike, incorrect Jytdog (talk) 18:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC))[reply]

See phys.org. And make no further changes to Energy Catalyzer without discussing in talk. Alanf777 (talk) 17:40, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You were actually correct that this is a rare instance of phys.org doing its own reporting and I have indeed made further changes at the article to restore it. My mistake - thanks for catching it.Jytdog (talk) 18:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alanf777. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alanf777. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alanf777. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gloria Scott (singer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mary Wilson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:14, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]