Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Chemistry Wiki Attempt

Quote:

And which AP test would that be? And somehow you high schoolers make me feel old...

AP US History...
Wow... Not fun, it was.
Just made an article on 1,2-Dichloroethane.

My career in high school included 11 of those tests and that was my least favorite outside of the two English ones(and maybe Calc). I hope you did well, though.

The Volatile Chemist - 18-9-2014 at 13:34

Got a solid 11/22. Not used to that. And the class average was 12/22. Won't be much editing tonight...

Texium - 18-9-2014 at 14:05

And I discovered today that I got a 79 on my first AP Physics test. That was a huge surprise and disappointment, especially considering that more people got A's than C's and I never get C's on tests...

Metacelsus - 18-9-2014 at 14:20

Ouch.

What went wrong?

The Volatile Chemist - 18-9-2014 at 14:58

That's sad zts16 :/ I'm looking forward to my next science classes (AP Chem and Honors Phys next)

Brain&Force - 18-9-2014 at 15:06

The first few tests are the hardest, as you may have no idea what you're doing. However, it's quite unusual that you received said score on the test. I have noticed that practical amateur chemistry does not really require the precision of what is expected in chemistry classes; the goals of amateur chemistry generally involve getting from product A to product B through some new route - in other words, synthesis. What questions did you struggle with?

I've started a new thread where we can discuss this further.

Zyklon-A - 18-9-2014 at 15:22

No I haven't, I'll try that. In the meantime I just noticed something, the wiki doesn't have a page for water

EDIT I just made one.

Someone should also make a page for "hydric acid". This is too funny.

Brain&Force - 19-9-2014 at 11:57

We've got way too many categories on the wiki. We have 216 categories, to be exact, for 212 pages. If you can find any duplicate, misspelled, or useless categories, please correct or delete them. Begin to fill up relatively empty categories by adding in relevant articles.

Also, I've noticed many categories have every word capitalized - unless the category includes proper nouns, don't capitalize any word but the first.

The Volatile Chemist - 19-9-2014 at 12:30

OK. It's my thought that ranking should not be used. It seems to distract people into getting a high rank without actually working (eg. the spike of categories). I wouldn't have spoken if I were a lower rank, but I'll admit that (prior to having obtained #2 rank) they were a big distraction. I really don't think they promote the right kind of editing. They should probably be turned off, in my opinion.

Texium - 19-9-2014 at 12:36

Next time I get a chance, I'll go through the categories and delete the useless ones. Also, I'll add a section to the editing guideline page describing the proper use of categories.
As for getting rid of rankings... I think that they should stay. Ever since we implemented those, many more edits have been made regularly than there were before. I don't know if it's a direct correlation, but they certainly don't hurt. We had just as many useless categories before. (I've done a couple of category deletion rampages already...)

Brain&Force - 19-9-2014 at 13:28

I second zts16, as there has been a huge spike in editing. We'll always have plenty of useless edits no matter what. However, what I think we need to do is put the list of pages and categories on the front page, that way people can see them immediately rather than just guess at what's there and what's not and avoid page merging, if possible.

Texium - 19-9-2014 at 14:08

Links to the lists you mean? Embedding the lists themselves would take up quite a bit of room.

Brain&Force - 19-9-2014 at 15:28

Yes, that's what I meant.

Amos - 19-9-2014 at 17:22

I definitely can confirm that I edit the wiki more because of the point system. I keep coming back everyday so that I can keep my number of days in a row up, and then when I get there, I find tons of stuff that I can add info too, and then I get ideas for new articles while doing it, etc. I wouldn't say that the whole wiki is going down in quality; just the whole category ordeal. I haven't noticed many poorly done edits, just frivolous category-adding. I think if we see somebody add a very questionable category for points' sake, the appropriate thing to do would be do call them out for it and then delete it. Nobody wants that kind of negative attention, so they'll probably stop. But guys, as far as the number of categories goes, I don't think that the numerical value is all that big of an issue. We have so many categories because even though we have few articles, we have covered a very diverse array of topics, and that should be indicated by the number of categories we have. As long as a category enhances the ability of someone to locate potential reagents/processes or to lead someone from one article to another in a way that encourages learning, it should stay. What we probably don't need is just grouping every single compound together because they share a single property(for example: red compounds, insoluble compounds) where that compound discusses none of the actual uses/chemistry of it.

Brain&Force - 21-9-2014 at 20:11

I've included an intentionally obfuscated synthesis of TATP on the Acetone peroxide page. Should we keep it?

Amos - 22-9-2014 at 03:22

I've included an intentionally obfuscated synthesis of TATP on the Acetone peroxide page. Should we keep it?

See, I'm kind of in favor of a detailed step-by-step process with all considerations included. If someone wants to make things that blow up, they're not going to say "oh well! I guess I can't make that if it's not on the wiki!"; they're going to browse the internet for second-rate sources(and there are lots of VERY shitty ones) and lose a limb trying to carry them out. Kewls will be kewls, so the least we can do is try to make sure they get the right information until they've wisened up.

Brain&Force - 23-9-2014 at 09:20

Hmm, you're right about that. Speaking of which, I think we should include more how-to articles on the wiki, and expand on the only one we have.

Amos - 23-9-2014 at 09:27

I agree wholeheartedly, I really enjoy articles that are a combination of useful information on the topic but also include more explicitly stated procedures for how to go about accomplishing things. That's what I was trying to do when I made my Chloroform article, one of my very first.

Brain&Force - 23-9-2014 at 11:43

I just created an edit track - you get badges for editing How-to articles. (Use the category "How-to")

gdflp - 24-9-2014 at 07:35

Just a suggestion for category deletion, we have two categories, one for bases which is supposed to be only for bronsted-lowry bases, and another which is "bronsted-lowry bases". "Bronsted-lowry bases" is the smaller category. If you need more admins on the wiki, I'd be happy to help.

Brain&Force - 24-9-2014 at 08:07

zts16 is a bureaucrat on the wiki and is the only person who has the power to elevate users. Ask him, I'm sure he'd appreciate the help.

The Volatile Chemist - 24-9-2014 at 13:39

I asked zts16 once, I think he wants a good bit more users before he promotes anyone.
But it was a while ago.

Brain&Force - 27-9-2014 at 18:07

I've included a "main article" template for synthesis pages and such. I've also included navboxes, but I don't know how to make them work like Wikipedia's, let alone make a periodic table template. They've been copied from http://templates.wikia.com/

[Edited on 28.9.2014 by Brain&Force]

Amos - 28-9-2014 at 05:55

How do you all feel about the existence of a "Hydrogen compounds" category that someone made, containing every compound with an atom of hydrogen in it? Or "Neutral salts"? Do either of those seem excessive?

gdflp - 28-9-2014 at 06:25

Neutral salts has been around for a while, I think it's fine. Hydrogen compounds I added a ton of articles to, but I didn't make it, I was just trying to help it along.

EDIT : Yay I'm a National Hazard now!! :cool:

[Edited on 9-28-2014 by gdflp]

Amos - 28-9-2014 at 07:05

Neutral salts has been around for a while, I think it's fine. Hydrogen compounds I added a ton of articles to, but I didn't make it, I was just trying to help it along.

EDIT : Yay I'm a National Hazard now!! :cool:

[Edited on 9-28-2014 by gdflp]

Grats on the achievement! My only real issue with hydrogen compounds is that most of the things in it are already in categories that imply hydrogen being contained in the structure. But for compounds like HF, HCl, H2O, etc. it's fine.

Texium - 28-9-2014 at 07:30

Quote: Originally posted by No Tears Only Dreams Now

[Edited on 9-28-2014 by gdflp]

I think that hydrogen compounds is definitely an excessive category. Hydrogen does so many different things in compounds that it really doesn't mean anything as a category. Two compounds that both contain an atom of hydrogen may have absolutely nothing else in common. (e.g. benzene and sodium bicarbonate) Also, picture somebody looking for a certain compound. They aren't going to think, "Well, I know it has hydrogen in it!" and then start looking at a bunch of hydrogen containing compounds.

Brain&Force - 28-9-2014 at 09:03

I want the hydrogen compounds category to be reserved for binary hydrogen compounds only (HF, H₂O, NH₃). It's the only useful way to do it.

Also, on a similar note, I've removed the Acids and Bases edit tracks, as there are too many subcategories for the tracks to work properly.

gdflp - 28-9-2014 at 10:30

Okay, sorry about that. I reverted the category to fit those requirements.

The Volatile Chemist - 28-9-2014 at 12:44

Cool. I still think 'hydrogen compounds' is excessive. Maybe ones that are binary, but it still seems a bit excessive. How about protionic hydrogen compounds? Someone write some articles on that, or hydrides. Then, maybe, 'hydrogen compounds' would be useful.
BTW, I'm trying to develop a form of 'amateur chemist search engine' for resources. I need some Ideas on how to do it/incorporate the wiki.

Mabus - 30-9-2014 at 02:04

Quote: Originally posted by No Tears Only Dreams Now

OK. I'm glad he's contributing, but he needs to try to sound more professional, or at least work on grammar.

Well, it does appear that you're still getting "its" and "it's" confused.

I normally wouldn't point that out, at least not in front of everyone else, but in this case I thought that it was appropriate since you were criticizing someone else's grammar.
Check yourself before you shrek yourself dude. (:

First, thanks a bunch for the shrek-related images running through my head now, zts16

Secondly, I don't think The Volatile Chemist has been told about this issue yet; that was all MabusWinnfield as far as I can recall. It is still one of the most common mistakes I see as well. "It's" is only used in instances when the two words "it is" would make sense; "Its" is for instances like the one zts16 pointed out, when you are applying a condition or possession to something. Apart from that, though, good work with the editing; Any addition of useful information is valued even if the grammar isn't intact.

Ah yes, I remember that. Sorry about that. I wrote the article when it was around 3:00 in the morning here, I'm surprised I even managed to write something legible.

On a side note, did anyone else got a message in the last few weeks saying the wiki database is temporarily locked for maintenance when trying to publish an edit? I worked on other wikis in the past, but I don't recall receiving such messages when I tried to publish.

The Volatile Chemist - 30-9-2014 at 15:39

Huh, I saw something in regards to it, but didn't edit anything that day, so I don't know if it was related...
Anyone else see a maintenance message?

Amos - 30-9-2014 at 17:40

I've seen messages saying that my edit couldn't be done because the article has been changed since you began, but that's all.

Texium - 30-9-2014 at 18:14

Quote: Originally posted by No Tears Only Dreams Now

I've seen messages saying that my edit couldn't be done because the article has been changed since you began, but that's all.

Ha, those are always fun (and a little awkward), especially when you've added the exact same thing as the other person, just with a different wording!

Amos - 30-9-2014 at 18:18

When I add the template, it jumps to the classic editor, which I hate. So I have to save it and then edit it with the other editor, leaving an empty article behind. That's why it happens to me.

Brain&Force - 30-9-2014 at 19:20

I've never seen a maintenance message, but I always cause editing conflicts

YOU LIKE THE VISUALEDITOR? WHAT? BLASPHEMER! (I find it unusable)

[edit] and you're inflating your edit count...hmm...this calls for a permaban!

[Edited on 1.10.2014 by Brain&Force]

Mabus - 1-10-2014 at 01:42

Hmm, guess I must have had bad luck then.

Amos - 1-10-2014 at 05:53

I've never seen a maintenance message, but I always cause editing conflicts

YOU LIKE THE VISUAL EDITOR? WHAT? BLASPHEMER! (I find it unusable)

[edit] and you're inflating your edit count...hmm...this calls for a permaban!

[Edited on 1.10.2014 by Brain&Force]

I would never use that plebeian classic editor! Besides, don't you think creating a whole new article and writing EVERY section yourself deserves more than one tiny edit?

gdflp - 1-10-2014 at 07:34

How do you feel about hydrides being in hydrogen compounds (e.g. LiAlH4)?

Mabus - 1-10-2014 at 07:57

Well, I'd say hydrides are a better representative of hydrogen compounds than say, acetic acid.

Amos - 1-10-2014 at 08:08

How do you feel about hydrides being in hydrogen compounds (e.g. LiAlH4)?

Yeah, that's one of the things I was getting at. Even though it's not a binary hydrogen compound, it is definitely still a hydride and those hydrogens definitely influence the chemistry of the compound, so I'd say that, and any other hydride, can be included in there.

The Volatile Chemist - 1-10-2014 at 12:02

It's a hydride, but shouldn't be labeled 'hydrogen compound'. It should be labeled hydride!
Regardless, WYSIWYG Editors are for quiche eaters.
(And yea, I actually kinda like quiche [but I'm no quiche eater!]...)

Amos - 1-10-2014 at 12:08

It's a hydride, but shouldn't be labeled 'hydrogen compound'. It should be labeled hydride!
Regardless, WYSIWYG Editors are for quiche eaters.
(And yea, I actually kinda like quiche [but I'm no quiche eater!]...)

Y'know, I agree with you now. More precise is better. Hydrides can be a subcategory of hydrogen compounds then.

Quiche is delicious. So is the visual editor.

[Edited on 10-1-2014 by No Tears Only Dreams Now]

Amos - 1-10-2014 at 12:13

I made a pretty big change to the wiki but it is easily fixed. I need to know what you all think of it. I got rid of the Brønsted-Lowry and Arrhenius categories, as when the wiki was originally made, the intent was for "Acid" and "Base" to imply the Brønsted-Lowry definition.

In order to get the Acid/Base tracks back for those badges, I have made it so that Lewis acids and Lewis bases still go in the category Acids or Bases, as well as their own respective categories, so that people can still get awards for editing those ones, as they're quite important. So if a compound is designated "base" but not a Lewis base, then it is a base by the Brønsted-Lowry base definition.

Do you guys think this works, or should we look for a better system?

Mabus - 2-10-2014 at 03:08

What happened to the ball and stick Limonene image? When I click on it, wiki tells me it's not there, but it doesn't appear to be deleted, I checked the deletion log.

gdflp - 2-10-2014 at 05:08

No idea, but I uploaded a new one and now it seems to be working.

What are your opinions on desiccant being in "Chemical compounds"? I think it's kind of a stretch.

EDIT : That's weird, both Mabus and I have the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon achievement, but the wiki claims only one person has it.

[Edited on 10-2-2014 by gdflp]

alexleyenda - 2-10-2014 at 20:59

Woot, the wiki finaly made it to a stick post :p University really gets me busy, I would really like to continue to help as before otherwise if like I didn't have to learn by earth tons of formulas like Van Der Waal and explain how to get to it by integrating from Boltzman's distribution -_-

@ No Tears Only Dreams Now : I guess your system is fine, the Brønsted-Lowry definition is the most usual definition while it is good to specify when an acid/base is from the Lewis definition. In fact my opinion would be to just put the Lewis ones in the "lewis acid" or "lewis base" category, and not in the general "acid" or "base" category because, in my head, I just can't consider things like carbocations and AlCl3 as acids. I am really too much used to think by the Brønsted-Lowry definition, as almost everyone else. Anyway, it doesn't mater much.

Brain&Force - 2-10-2014 at 21:49

I asked Polverone to top this thread and the "tired of reporting spam" thread, as they seem to be well-used.

Mabus - 4-10-2014 at 08:15

I just wrote Proper disposal of chemicals, where everything related to chemicals disposal should be added and I have a question.
Do we have any table template? I was thinking of adding a table with every chemical wrote on the wiki and add columns about disposal: neutralization, whether or not can be poured down the drain, heat treatment, etc.

[Edited on 4-10-2014 by Mabus]

[Edited on 4-10-2014 by Mabus]

Texium - 4-10-2014 at 09:27

Quote: Originally posted by Mabus

I just wrote Proper disposal of chemicals, where everything related to chemicals disposal should be added and I have a question.
Do we have any table template? I was thinking of adding a table with every chemical wrote on the wiki and add columns about disposal: neutralization, whether or not can be poured down the drain, heat treatment, etc.

A table like that would be a great idea! There's probably a table template. You can check out the templates wiki and see. I found this hidden table template, for a collapsible table, but I couldn't find a normal table one.
Overall, adding templates and stuff is confusing and headache-inducing, at least to me, but I can add this one if you'd like.

Brain&Force - 4-10-2014 at 21:05

I really think we need to start getting working templates on the wiki. "Proper disposal of chemicals" is a great idea!

[edit] NEW EDIT TRACK: Elements

[Edited on 5.10.2014 by Brain&Force]

Texium - 4-10-2014 at 21:07

Yeah, I didn't add the template, but I added a brief section to the page about recycling earlier today.

The Volatile Chemist - 9-10-2014 at 06:10

There should probably be a safe disposal part of the chemicals template.

Amos - 9-10-2014 at 07:46

There should probably be a safe disposal part of the chemicals template.

When I write articles, if there's a special disposal route to be followed I usually just include that within safety.

Brain&Force - 9-10-2014 at 08:05

I'll modify the template's safety section to being safety, storage, and disposal. (I guess it would be retitled "Handling."

Amos - 9-10-2014 at 08:29

I'll modify the template's safety section to being safety, storage, and disposal. (I guess it would be retitled "Handling."

Time for a huge spike in editing, then. Get some while it's hot.

gdflp - 9-10-2014 at 08:51

I can't understand, why do the infoboxes show up as code, rather than an infobox?

gdflp - 9-10-2014 at 09:08

Is there any difference between the "rare earth metals", and "lanthanides" categories? They seem redundant.

Brain&Force - 9-10-2014 at 12:10

Rare earths include scandium, yttrium, AND the actinides (I think).

Texium - 9-10-2014 at 12:59

Not trying to argue with an RE nut, but I'm pretty sure that the actinides are not considered rare-earths, only the lanthanides, scandium, and yttrium.

Amos - 9-10-2014 at 13:27

Not trying to argue with an RE nut, but I'm pretty sure that the actinides are not considered rare-earths, only the lanthanides, scandium, and yttrium.

This is correct.

Brain&Force - 9-10-2014 at 19:15

Yeah, you're right.

Now I can't think of the right term for f-block elements and group 3 metals.

Mabus - 10-10-2014 at 04:41

I noticed few references for the Sciencemadness Library on the wiki. Should there be a section for it, or should any references just be added to the refs section? I added for example, one link to a book from the library about alkaloids for the Nicotine article in a Ref subsection.

Brain&Force - 12-10-2014 at 20:55

I can't use a WYSIWYG editor in Internet Explorer. Anyone else have that problem? I can only edit the source.

I don't want to switch from Internet Explorer since Firefox has terrible touch support and Chrome seems to kill battery life on the Surface Pro 3, as well as take over RAM.

gdflp - 13-10-2014 at 10:15

:mad:

I needed to take the SAT's again on Saturday, and I forgot to edit the wiki that day. 26/30 to "Devoted" :mad:

Amos - 13-10-2014 at 12:33

I needed to take the SAT's again on Saturday, and I forgot to edit the wiki that day. 26/30 to "Devoted" :mad:

I lost my 32 days out of 60 for dedicated. Hopefully your SAT went well though. I was personally more a fan of the ACT.

Brain&Force - 13-10-2014 at 12:58

I lost 21/30 for Devoted due to the local airshow last week...but I got the last two lucky edits!

Amos - 13-10-2014 at 13:07

I lost 21/30 for Devoted due to the local airshow last week...but I got the last two lucky edits!

So it's been you this whole time. Nearly 1/5th of the edits are mine and I still haven't gotten one of those.

Brain&Force - 13-10-2014 at 14:23

I guess you just aren't lucky :cool:

Anyway, anyone have any issues with only seeing the Source Editor in Internet Explorer?

gdflp - 13-10-2014 at 14:58

Quote: Originally posted by No Tears Only Dreams Now

I lost my 32 days out of 60 for dedicated. Hopefully your SAT went well though. I was personally more a fan of the ACT.

Yeah, personally I liked the ACT better too. I've taken the SAT before, but I was too young so my score got deleted. The funny thing is I'm in Organic Chem I right now and I just need the SAT to apply for a scholarship.

Brain&Force Yeah only the source editor shows on IE on my computer too, though Firefox works fine. I don't know what the problem is.

[Edited on 10-13-2014 by gdflp]

DrMario - 25-10-2014 at 03:15

Is there an entry point to the structure of this Wiki? I mean, is there an index?

Texium - 25-10-2014 at 06:29

There is one here, but it doesn't work very well. I wish it would just display all of the pages, but it won't. Wikia has a lot of problems. One reason that I would like to get it off of there.

DrMario - 25-10-2014 at 06:37

There is one here, but it doesn't work very well. I wish it would just display all of the pages, but it won't. Wikia has a lot of problems. One reason that I would like to get it off of there.

Thanks a lot. But ummm... There's absolutely nothing there.

Click on Wiki Content and still nothing.

Texium - 25-10-2014 at 06:49

Yeah, you have to type in the search bars where you want your search to start and end alphabetically.

Screen Shot 2014-10-25 at 9.50.12 AM.png - 23kB

Does it show this?

[Edited on 10-25-2014 by zts16]

DrMario - 25-10-2014 at 07:49

Yeah, you have to type in the search bars where you want your search to start and end alphabetically.

Does it show this?

[Edited on 10-25-2014 by zts16]

Yes, that search widget is there. It would be much better to know what is available, not stabbing around in the dark.

Texium - 25-10-2014 at 08:00

Try from 1 to Z. The only thing missing from that search is zinc and its compounds. 1 to Zinc Sulfide would cover everything, but for some reason that doesn't work.

Mabus - 11-11-2014 at 10:41

I am considering adding a page about chemistry related software (Chemsketch, ChemDraw, Chem 3D, CAMEO, Yenka, etc.), but I don't have a good name for the title.
Any suggestions?

Amos - 11-11-2014 at 11:24

"Chemistry software" or "Software tools for chemistry", or just "software tools" all seem fine. One of us can always change it later.

Brain&Force - 11-11-2014 at 13:29

Don't forget MarvinBeans! Love that software.

The Volatile Chemist - 11-11-2014 at 18:49

And Open Babel! Absolutely THE BEST EVER!
I have written two pieces of software that I can write on in the wiki, but I have a super-busy schedule, I won't get to it till the weekend.
I also would like to request that I be allowed to make a series of manganese articles. I can start them on Saturday, but I just wanted to ask that people would wait for me to start them, as I am rather excited about the topic, and have been experimenting with manganese recently. It's just that I started a thread which has become popular on manganese chloride, and I think that might draw attention to the subject. It would be very courteous if everyone would let me write those articles!
Thanks!
I hope to get working on the wiki a bunch this weekend!
-Nathan P, TVC

Mabus - 12-11-2014 at 11:58

I have to say, I don't like the new wiki Visual Editor, as I can't access the Source directly (I prefer the Source as it's easier to correct mistakes).

The Volatile Chemist - 12-11-2014 at 14:01

Quote: Originally posted by Mabus

I have to say, I don't like the new wiki Visual Editor, as I can't access the Source directly (I prefer the Source as it's easier to correct mistakes).

Same, but there isn't much we can do about it. I still like the idea of hosting it all on a server with media-wiki, it's a better interface, but it doesn't matter too much.

Brain&Force - 15-12-2014 at 18:16

http://sciencemadness.wikia.com/wiki/User:Hayzgalee

Killed my first spambot - his page is locked so that only I can edit it

Amos - 15-12-2014 at 18:46

What was it posting?

Brain&Force - 15-12-2014 at 19:28

A spam post on its blog here.

The Volatile Chemist - 17-12-2014 at 12:51

Yeah, I saw it, but didn't know how to deal with it, so I left it.

Mabus - 19-12-2014 at 15:39

Added Chemical test, where all important chemical tests should be listed and linked to their respective article.

Mabus - 20-12-2014 at 03:22

Huh? I thought I was logged on when I wrote the article. I was logged on this morning and I still am.

[Edited on 20-12-2014 by Mabus]

The Volatile Chemist - 21-12-2014 at 14:14

Sounds like a good list. I'll have to add PTLct-2, a potassium ferrocyanide/potassium ferricyanide metal ion testing solution

(just kidding...)
Making good progress on the wiki.

Mabus - 30-12-2014 at 04:10

Welp, wikia did it again. Lost my edit now :mad:

Mabus - 4-1-2015 at 07:25

What the **** happened? I made two edits yesterday, you can clearly see it in the wiki log, and now it tells me I lost a day? :mad:

Some Happy New Year from Wikia.

Amos - 4-1-2015 at 11:15

No idea how, but a huge number of pictures are somehow missing from the wiki. If you click on their links you get a message saying they're no longer available!

Brain&Force - 4-1-2015 at 11:21

I'm not seeing this. Can you give me example photos?

Amos - 4-1-2015 at 18:00

I'm not seeing this. Can you give me example photos?

Ah, it's all back the way it should be. Could've been a bad connection in the earlier half of the day, or maybe something weird went on with the wikia servers. Either way it's fine now.

The Volatile Chemist - 5-1-2015 at 14:31

What are you-all's thoughts on a missing persons page of the SM Wiki? Just thought it might be a good Idea. No-one make it till we've discussed it, though.

diddi - 5-1-2015 at 15:07

thx the Brain&Force for encouragement and assistance to put up first contribution to the wiki. i was not logged in properly when i started the page and it is now attributed to an anonymous user. is it possible to get that changed?

Brain&Force - 5-1-2015 at 15:18

Nope, I wish I could do that!

Brain&Force - 5-1-2015 at 18:04