User talk:129.215.195.81

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Uranium trioxide

Maybe I could take your argument about deleting the word "hexavalent" seriously, if you weren't also deleting the NIST-based diagram along with it. --James S. 17:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Please try to refrain from making personal attacks. Your arguments are not convincing me.

The aerial oxidation has been the source of some interest, and the nitrogen salts are important for any discussion of the uranyl oxide gas production from combustion in air.

What is the source where you found the gamma polymorph ions? --James S. 20:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Appeal to authority

Wikipedia is one great big appeal to authority: Wikipedia:Verifiability. --James S. 19:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pillar of civility

Wikipedia follows the writers' rules of engagement: Respect your fellow Wikipedians even when you may not agree with them. Be civil. Avoid making personal attacks or sweeping generalizations. Stay cool when the editing gets hot; avoid lame edit wars by following the three-revert rule; remember that there are 2,413,472 articles on the English Wikipedia to work on and discuss. Act in good faith by never disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, and assume the same of others in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary. Don't use sockpuppets to do wrong or circumvent policy. Be open, welcoming, and inclusive. (emphasis added) --James S. 21:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do you insist on continuing to remove the Simon Cotton quote about aerial oxidation creating uranyl compounds on the premise only that the nitrides don't apply? The sub-topic is about combustion. I believe that sufficient information is already in Uranium#Combustion products include teratogens. --James S. 21:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)