This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gregorydavid (talk | contribs) at 22:25, 11 August 2006 (working with concrete.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:25, 11 August 2006 by Gregorydavid (talk | contribs) (working with concrete.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Geosynthetics
Noticed you are currently involved with the geotechnical engineering article. I've just extented the Geosynthetics article from a stub. Hoping to take the article somewhere. (I think engineering is generally neglected in Misplaced Pages). Was wondering if you'd take a look and see what you think. It's by no means finished but think it's got a backbone now. Comments/Edits etc. will be very welcomed. I'll be more than happy to return the favour with the Geotechnical Engineering article when you want. Regards Grahams Child 20:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- On a basic skim, it looks ok. The one thing which jumped out at me was that you don't mention "spun" fibers, commonly used for filter fabrics. I'll have a more detailed look later. Argyriou 23:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
welcome
|
(Hpetwe 21:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC))
EL DORADO
HEY THERE Argyriou; TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I DONT REALLY KNOW THE ECONOMICS OF EL DORADO, BUT I'M UNDERSTOOD, THAT RENOVATION IS TAKING PLACE, WHICH FORCE AIRLINES TO PAY MORE TAXES. THE REASON IS, THAT EL DORADO INTERNATIONAL IS PLANNING TO HAVE A BEUTIFUL AIRPORT, THAT WILL SERVE PASSANGERS THAT VISIT COLOMBIA BETTER, WHICH HELPS WITH THE ECONOMICS OF COLOMBIA, AVIANCA IS ALSO PLANNING TO MOVE ITS HUB FROM "EL DORADO" TO A DIFFERENT AIRPORT IN COLOMBIA, DUE TO THE HIGH TAXES.
YOU COULD FIND MORE INFO ON WWW.AIRLINNERS.NET, JUST GO TO THE FORUM AND TYPE AVIANCA, EL DORADO, ETC, YOU COULD FIND MORE INFO THERE, THEY GIVE YOU LINKS TO COLOMBIAN ECONOMICS REGARDING AVIANCA, AND THE AIRPORT FACTS..
I hope this will help! ColBog
CBR
The AASHTO pavement design procedure has used resilient modulus to characterize the subgrade material since at least 1986 (I'm not sure that it ever used CBR). That'll remain the same in the new AASHTO guide. Resilient modulus is very difficult to measure in the lab, so lots of agencies use a CBR correlation to estimate resilient modulus. The r-value test is used the same way in some agencies (perhaps all other than California that perform the test) - not used directly in pavement design, but as a resilient modulus estimator. Toiyabe 21:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Grain size
Seeing your interest in geotechnical engineering and soil properties, you may be interested in responding to questions I posted at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Soil#Soil_types:
Conflicting particle size criteria needs to be resolved and affects the following articles: ...
-- Paleorthid 19:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
How to get listed in Category:Engineer Wikipedians
Please see my response to your posting at User talk:Mbeychok/MRB's Survey of Wikipedian Engineers where I have told you how to get listed in the Category:Engineer Wikipedians -mbeychok 02:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
bay mud
thanks for your constructive edits to this article. best regards. ill be on the lookout for non-bay area info. Covalent 19:02, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Re: Ron Dellums edit
Thanks. I think it must be in the height of the DoS attack by users of different source that I slipped my eye. If I am wrong just feel free to revert my reverts. --WinHunter 00:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Democratic Party (United States) edits
(copied from my talk page at User talk:Deville)
Why'd you revert "social democracy" to "social liberalism"? "Social liberalism" is generally a U.S.-centric term which means supporting the sorts of social positions the Democrats do, without reference to being economically liberal or conservative (or to being a foreign-policy liberal or conservative). In Europe, most of the parties whose platform is closest to the Democrats tend to call themselves "Social Democrats". The article social liberalism is rather confused, though the statement Social democrats believe in the moral right of the majority to regulate everyone and everything. Social liberals see democracy and parliamentarianism as mere political systems which legitimize themselves only through the amount of liberty they promote make it seem that the "social liberal" label should apply more to a tendency within the Republican Party rather than the Democratic Party, as that statement makes social liberalism sound much more capitalist than the Democrats.
- This is a good question. I could be convinced that social democracy is a more appropriate label for the Democrats than social liberalism (BTW, you're right, that article is a bit opaque). But if you check my edit summary you'll see that my main objection is that the change makes the sentence no longer make sense. As written, one point of that sentence is to contrast the two liberal philosophies mentioned with classical liberalism. In any case, I'm ok with you rewriting the sentence and putting a appropriate link to social democracy, but I definitely think that simply making the change social liberal --> social democracy makes the sentence weird. In short, I've no objection to a reference to social democracy given that it fits into the article. Sound good? --Deville (Talk) 00:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for response to my survey of Wikipedian engineers
If you are interested, the summary of my survey is available at User:Mbeychok/MRB's Survey of Wikipedian Engineers. Thanks for your response. - mbeychok 04:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Oakland, California
I reverted your edits. I had never heard of the nicknames either, but there was a long discussion on the talk page about nicknames a few months back. These are the one we settled on.
personally, i want "biggity biggity o" up there.
Sparsefarce 17:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Changes at Template:User cal
Hello, we changed the settings for the Cal userbox to allow you to personalize the text. Please check out the talk page for more info. ~ trialsanderrors 22:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. I've also copied the template to my userboxen page per WP:GUS. I have not removed the original one. Argyriou 23:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Poll
Hi! Your vote/opinion on brewery notability is requested here: SilkTork 12:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- Replied, a while ago.
Actually
The Anarcho-Capitalist page is already disputed, as you will see in the gray box in the anarchism article. Someone keeps removing the POV tag from the page when it is quite obvious from the talk page that it is a disputed article. that is another obvious indication that that article is NPOV. why don't you send a message to the person who keeps removing that appropriate tag. is that person you? thanks for your concern, Blockader 20:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
- The fact that some anarchists don't believe that anarcho-capitalism is actually a species of anarchism is not proof that the anarcho-capitalism article is written from a non-neutral perspective. Go read WP:NPOV, and show me where the article is displaying a non-neutral POV. There's an old dispute on the talk page, after which the article was cleaned up significantly. There's an existing dispute on the talk page over whether AC is A, but that dispute is reported in the article. Argyriou 21:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
nice edit
of barrington intro. Cindery 01:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Irish and Scottish céilídh
It does get a bit confusing at times as Scottish Gaelic is decended from Old Irish Gaelic, usually called just Old Irish, having broken away about 1000 A.D. There are reformed spellings etc since the 1950's onwards, but I don't know how they apply in this instance. Here are the origns of the word, hope it helps clarify things.
From Irish. ceilidhe, from Old Irish ceile meaning "companion." Red blaze 00:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Removal of requests for flowcharts
I have added to the talk page this comment: "Nothing in my comments necessitates its being original research. The information could very well be already somewhere on the World Wide Web." Wavelength 21:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Concrete
Hi, I see you are gradually tidying up as you go along.. The introduction needs to be redone too, bits and pieces tend to get added up there from time to time. Have you thought about making a clearer distinction between concrete the material at the time of mix design and placing, and how it behaves once it is cast solid into structures and has to survive the elements? And the production of concrete and the selection of concrete for particular requirements.. The there is the "Structural analysis" Cheers. Gregorydavid 22:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)