User talk:Dbsseven

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Because I am quite interested in K⁺ channels, I was happy to see your thoughtful and knowledgeable edits at Potassium channel. You may perhaps also be interested in WP:WikiProject Neuroscience. Please feel free to get in touch with me at my user talk page any time if you have any questions at all about editing here. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are one of the winners of the 2014 WikiProject Biophysics Wiki-edit Contest, and are hereby awarded this barnstar for your excellent work on the Major facilitator superfamily article.

Please contact the Biophysical Society office (email: [email protected]) to give them your contact information and be signed up for your free 2015 Society membership, free registration for the 2015 BPS 59th annual meeting in Baltimore in February ([1]), and $100 cash award. If you submit an abstract (by Oct 1) you would be a good candidate for a student travel award, citing your contest win (by Oct 3).

If you reply to this message -- either here or on my talk page or by email to [email protected] -- and let me know your name & address, I'll mail out your WikiProject Biophysics button to you.

I hope to see you at the meeting! Dcrjsr (talk) 17:49, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contribution to the sugar glider article. I read the source that you cited, and unless I missed something, it is ambiguous as to whether gliders are included/excluded. If you'd like to discuss this, lets move the discussion to the article's talk page, since I am currently working from a temporary IP. Thanks again. --Eric, IP=107.15.152.93 (talk) 18:42, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on the talk page (you were right).  ;)   ~E:107.15.152.93 (talk) 21:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm sorry about the recent edits to the MFS superfamily page, particularly regarding the vague summary (I didn't realize that the table was minimized) and the edits on the evolution of this superfamily. My PI has told me that the evolutionary pathway of the MFS transporters was highly debated in the past (within the last year), but is now generally agreed upon. However, I will ask him about this again and see if he is just forcing his views. In the future, I will try to be more detailed with my summaries. Thanks for your help! Jimmyhdo93 (talk) 18:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	great job! Jaludvigsen9 (talk) 20:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dbsseven, User:FF9600 reverted all of my changes to the GPU Chipset table layout. So if you could (re-)voice your opinion on the layout here: Talk:List of AMD graphics processing units#Issues with Wikiinger.27s Proposed Table Changes would be much appreciated, Wikiinger (talk) 11:24, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Cortex-A73 a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. If you're the only editor so far on the page you're trying to move, it's okay, actually, but the Mediawiki function is still preferred. Also, it's normal to maintain a redirect page from the source of the move to the destination. Thanks, ansh666 03:29, 30 March 2017 (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.

Tensor processing unit

added links pointing to Mm, Multiplier, Watts and Accumulator

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have found some sites, which about h.265 supporting in GPUs:

• Guide to HEVC_H.265 Encoding and Playback
• Display Matters Virtual Super Resolution, Frame Rate Targeting, and HEVC Decoding - The AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Review Aiming For the Top
• AMD Radeon R9 380X Review: feat. Asus

R9 Fury Series supports up to h.265 4k@8bit but R9 380(X) doesn't, also I am a user of R9 380 and I have tested for it. HEVC 4K@10bit support is one of the distinguishing feature in RX 480, which AMD promoted[2]. --Porsche613 (talk) 18:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My issue was that your initial edits did not have sources. Also, if you want to reply, perhaps do so here so the conversation isn't spread over two talk pages. Dbsseven (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sanjay Mehrotra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Computer Sciences. 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) 10:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If they only consist of an URL, might be better to use unnamed external links instead, which will be numbered automatically. [3] [4] I'm not sure, just a suggestion. --Pizzahut2 (talk) 22:31, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have uploaded or added to a page, specifically Template:Country data Commonwealth of Nations, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:07, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit constitutes an edit war. Your edit will be reverted without sufficient explanation. Benchmarks can be used to compare performance between CPU architectures. The statement that I removed is inaccurate. The articles cited as evidence are not factual, they are opinion pieces without sourcing, and outdated. They're referring to GeekBench 3, which is no longer used. The second source, from OSNews, is simply a blog post of the author's opinion. Not a valid source. The first source, from PC World, simply says "some have claimed" with no concrete evidence. It's simply the author's personal opinion. Not a valid source. Dnywlsh (talk) 21:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Dnywlsh:. I appreciate your good faith effort to engage in a discussion about the recent edits on the Apple mobile application processors article. However, you assertion that my edit constitutes an edit war is not supported by the WP definition/policy regarding an edit war. Rather my edit was a single revert, and a natural part of the WP "be bold, revert, discuss" process. I have begun a discussion on the talk page to attempt to find consensus on this issue, and suggest we discuss this issue there. Dbsseven (talk) 23:07, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:AMD Ryzen#Navbars for table templates?--Pizzahut2 (talk) 17:08, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the expansion, feel free to remove the prod template. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:03, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! Nice sources - I read all the new ones (and cheekily fixed the 2017-2011 typo on one). Thanks again, SteepLearningCurve (talk) 14:39, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	It's great to know an editor who can cut through the heated arguments and seek Consensus as you are doing on the Intel article. (This time, I am involved in the heated debate. But there are times when I have also helped get consensus.) Peter K Burian (talk) 19:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Made a template for the somewhat convoluted navbar code, so only this template needs to be changed instead of all templates containing navbar code. This is especially useful if the VE code stops working in the future and needs to be removed. As you can see in the template documentation, you can simply copy & paste this code:

{{navbar-table|{{subst:PAGENAME}}}} 

So no need to edit the page name as it's substituted. — Pizzahut2 (talk) 12:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my edits which had added some human-readable descriptions to product names. I would argue that these were especially important for anyone looking for general information on AMD graphics technologies, as many brand names are not easily understandable at a glance, which is the point of this kind of table, no?

Ex: Imagine it is your first time looking at the Audio/Video acceleration section; you see: Unified Video Decoder, simple enough, it probably just decodes video; but then you have something like Video Coding Engine which sounds like it is an encoding+decoding engine (why else would you say "coding", right?) - nope, it's encoding only; and then Video Core Next and TrueAudio which just sound like marketing gibberish.

Thoughts?

Pilearch (talk) 05:04, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:AMD custom APU#Edit conflict due to non-Jaguar custom APUs — Pizzahut2 (talk) 00:16, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ryzen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The Ryzen Wikipedia article is simply too messy to even manage. *Fails to properly create a move. *Users who monitors seem to got lost on how to monitor this page. *Contain too much over hyped AMD fans comments mixed with article information from sources. These information almost like saying AMD is better than Intel. *The page not needed to be created anyways as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Ryzen_microprocessors exists.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Regice2020 (talk) 23:27, 19 June 2019 (UTC) {{subst:afd}[reply]

Hi, This is a note to ask: would you be interested in submitting any articles for external, academic peer review to improve their accuracy and generate a citable publication?

The WikiJournal of Science (www.wikijsci.org) aims to couple the rigour of academic peer review with the extreme reach of the encyclopedia. For existing Wikipedia articles, it's a great way to get additional feedback from external experts. Peer-reviewed articles are dual-published both as standard academic PDFs, as well as having changes integrated back into Wikipedia. This improves the scientific accuracy of the encyclopedia, and rewards authors with citable, indexed publications. It also provides much greater reach than is normally achieved through traditional scholarly publishing.

The WP:WikiJournal article nominations page should allow simple submission of existing Wikipedia pages for external review. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 06:11, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]