User talk:RolfSander

Hello RolfSander, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing! AmiDaniel (talk) 09:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Thanks for uploading Image:Gaenselieselbrunnen.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Acp cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you happen to know some details about this classic work like the on line (un)availability? Has it been digitized or not?--MagnInd (talk) 15:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks in advance for any useful info you can find!--MagnInd (talk) 15:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, you can buy it here:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Abhandlungen-Zur-Thermodynamik-Herma-Helmholtz/dp/1141513110/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1314373788&sr=1-10

The paper that you mention seems to be a chapter in this book but I'm not sure RolfSander (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems a bit surprising that IUPAC documents do not distinguish between the two concepts.--MagnInd (talk) 21:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the IUPAC web page is the same for both. To me, only "volume fraction" seems to be well defined. In the absense of a proper definition of "volume concentration" I have to assume that it is exactly the same...--RolfSander (talk) 17:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be an an inconsistency between volume fraction and volume percent in cases like water-ethanol mixtures.--MagnInd (talk) 21:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It also seems that for non-ideal mixtures like alcoholic ones the volume fraction is easy to calculate but difficult to measure due ton volume non-additivity while volume procent/concentration is easy to measure.(?)--MagnInd (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Acp cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What data are there concerning Henry′s law constants for gas solubilities in partial miscible multiphasic liquids? And how is the expression of the law in these situations? Is the constant additive? (consisting from contributions give by the solubilities in each of liquids and the partial miscibility domain). (of course taking activities into consideration when necessary).--MagnInd (talk) 17:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I've only looked at Henry's law for aqueous solutions (I'm an atmospheric chemist: distribution between air and clouds). I cannot help you here--RolfSander (talk) 19:32, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is the solubility of gas in aqueous solutions, say oxigen, influenced by presence of electrolytes comparatively to distiled water and how? Is the value of the constant from the law different or activity coefficient comes into play in this case?--MagnInd (talk) 21:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Solubiity of gases decreases with increasing salt concontration of the solution. To see how it is linked to Henry's law, I suggest you google "Sechenov equation" to find out more.--RolfSander (talk) 21:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. Perhaps a redirect would be useful Sechenov equation and the article Henry law should be added infos concerning the influence of electrolytes found on google search.--MagnInd (talk) 12:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to add a Sechenov section to the Henry's law page, go ahead! I currently have too many things to do to start with this.--RolfSander (talk) 19:34, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Happy New Year, with many (wikipedian) achievements, my wikipedian fellow RolfSander!--MagnInd (talk) 20:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is the atmospheric importance of deuterium?--MagnInd (talk) 23:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deuterium (and other isotopes) are mainly used as a diagnostic tool: [1] --RolfSander (talk) 11:17, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What data are there concerning the atmospheric abundance of deuterated hydroperoxyl?--MagnInd (talk) 21:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Relative atomic mass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Resolving power (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) 12:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which one of these two names should be in the title of the article?--MagnInd (talk) 18:59, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or should it be redirected to molar concentration?--MagnInd (talk) 19:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When there are several names, I always prefer the name that IUPAC recommends: [2], i.e. osmotic concentration. They say it was "formerly called osmolarity". A link to this goldbook page should probably be added to the article as well.--RolfSander (talk) 20:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is the exact statement of Raoult's law for aqueous electrolytes considering van't Hoff factor? It seems that there is a persistent erroneous statement neglecting electrolyte dissociation even in meteorology and atmospheric chemistry sources.--MagnInd (talk) 20:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't know.--RolfSander (talk) 20:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vapor quality, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mass fraction (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) 11:30, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you happen to know who the eponym of Köhler theory might be? Google search is not very useful.--MagnInd (talk) 20:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I also tried to find the origin but so far without success. I will try to ask my colleagues from meteorology, maybe they know (I'm a chemist).--RolfSander (talk) 20:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the persistence of the name percent concentration, how was mass fraction called when encountered it first time in the elementary textbook? Was it called mass fraction or percent concentration?--MagnInd (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eurocycle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Altenstadt (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) 13:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you give further details on the need to use different indexes in the numerator and denominator of volume fraction?--188.26.22.131 (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you requested rollback right at WP:PERM. That right can only be used when the edit is obvious vandalism. The example you mentioned is not obvious vandalism because the user might be thinking that their edits are helpful to wikipedia. I want to tell you that there are other ways of reverting consecutive edits by same user. You can use Twinkle, it gives non rollbackers the ability to rollback, you can enable it in preferences. Another way is to edit the version, which is in good condition. You can see second method in detail here. Thank you Supdiop ^talk 10:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the hint! It worked, I don't need the rollback right anymore. RolfSander (talk) 11:48, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RolfSander. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Geoscientific Model Development, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
• instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you. Randykitty (talk) 15:42, 1 October 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) 13:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RolfSander. 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]

I saw your rightful revert in European Geosciences Union too late, so I added more journals which should not have been there. None of the added journals were EGU. Possibly all the Copernicus journals could be placed in Copernicus Publications. However, as they contain for a large part EGU journals, that would result in overlap/copying of information. What do you think? Hulten (talk) 09:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello! Yes, mentioning the journals on the Copernicus page is a good idea. Maybe list only the non-EGU journals, and then show a link to the EGU journal category: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:European_Geosciences_Union_academic_journals RolfSander (talk) 10:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the feedback. There is also a Copernicus Publications academic journals category. Neither the EGU nor the Copernicus category can contain all the journals as long as there is no Wikipedia page of the respective journals. A complete list of the Copernicus journals is easy to find (two clicks away from the Wikipedia page). The list will change. All things considered, I won't add a list of journals on the Copernicus page, not right now anyway. Hulten (talk) 14:47, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, RolfSander! What would be the suficient number of references for the molality fraction name?--82.137.9.166 (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RolfSander. 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, RolfSander. 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, RolfSander! I notice you have commented at talk:Volume fraction re the status of Volume percent, whose definition is a bit unclear or ambiguous. How do you see a possible addition to volume concentration of content from Wikipedia in German article de:Volumenkonzentration, which I see it is based on the source DIN 1310 ?--109.166.132.159 (talk) 00:08, 22 August 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) 00:07, 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) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (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) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to draft space, where you can work on bringing it up to the required standard for inclusion, before submitting for an independent review. Deb (talk) 09:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TheBritinator was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Meridians (game) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TheBritinator (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RolfSander! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! TheBritinator (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Meridians (game). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]