This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ErrantX (talk | contribs) at 21:11, 24 August 2006 (Eco-cement blanking). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:11, 24 August 2006 by ErrantX (talk | contribs) (Eco-cement blanking)(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)
Review requested
Greetings:
Could you please review Hayward Fault Zone, and please refer other knowlegeble editors to this effort? I am considering nominating this article for featured status.
Thank you for your assistance, - Leonard G. 03:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure there are other "knowlegeable editors" that would be good to refer to. I'd want to see a little more about the geology and seismology of the fault, which I might be able to look up and provide, given a little time. Argyriou 22:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- No hurry, and thank you. - Leonard G. 04:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
what is your problem with alameda measure a??
Hey - what is the problem you have with Alameda Measure A? You don't even live in Alameda - you live in Oakland. And you reverted my links to external sites from the Alameda page - those links are fair game.
You shouldn't be authoritative over the Alameda web page - you don't even live here. And your political views are well documents, so you are exercising your own biases by editing the Alameda Measure A wiki. Dave H.
Jump to: navigation, search
I'll be living in Alameda before the year is over. Your Alameda measure a page isn't an encyclopedia article, it's a campaign flyer, and doesn't belong here. Your edits to the Alameda, California article don't add any substantive content to the article. If you want to write an encyclopedic - descriptive, neutral, and free of personal attacks - article about Measure A, feel free. But the "article" you wrote is no such thing. Argyriou 15:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
So you won't screw with a link on the Alameda page to an encyclopedic article on Measure A? There's no reason there shouldn't be a link from the Alameda entry to a Measure A entry. A link, by definition, isn't substantive. And you still don't live in Alameda. Dave H.
Ooh! Ooh! You'll ask the Misplaced Pages administrators to take action against me! Oooh! Ooh! You're pretty emotionally wrapped up in something yourself. In the nineteen eighties, it was Dungeons & Dragons, today, it's Misplaced Pages. How's this page - starting to look more balanced? http://en.wikipedia.org/Alameda_Measure_A
Argyriou 22:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Your Alameda Measure A article is a better start than the older Alameda measure a article, beginning with the title. However, it still needs much improvement. An article about Measure A should be an overview of the whole measure, beginning with its enactment, with current controversies at the end of the article. The article should:
* Begin with an introduction which briefly summarizes the law.
* Explains the historical context in which the law was passed.
* Discusses changes made or attempted before the current controversy, if any.
* Discuss the controversy by explaining:
o What's new that makes people want to change Measure A (Alameda Point development)
o Summarizes, fairly, the arguments made on each side of the issue.
Some of those changes can be made by shuffling existing text around, but your descriptions of the advocates for relaxing measure A restrictions is still incredibly unfair and biased, and needs serious re-work. Argyriou 23:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
It's a work in progress. Your description on the City of Alameda entry of Measure A advocates as a "vocal minority" oppposed to any development on alameda point is inaccurate, and incredibly unfair and biased. I touched it up to make it less biased. If you're moving to Alameda by the end of the year, why don't you get smart on Measure A and make some contributions to the page rather than just flagging it continually.
Well, as I say - get smart on Alameda and the history of Measure A and help me balance it out, rather than just harping and over-reacting.
More on Ron Dellums
Regarding your comment on my talk page: please re-read my edit summaries and the talk page (over the last few months) for the article. Also, I find it strange that you would use the term "vandalism" for my reverting to an older version to restore information that was part of the article being listed as a candidate for a good article, while not immediately restoring the dozens on in-line links. In any case it's been cleaned up now. And you might think twice before long-time editors of vandalism. Please see Misplaced Pages:Civility for more. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 17:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if this is the wrong place for it
But I would like to confirm that I did in fact create that charter school image. It is probably most likely outdated by now.
Image:Charter schools.gif
-Allthewhile
Alameda Measure A
Argyriou - you slapped my hand for introducing POV to the Alameda Measure A page. I expect you to do the same for Michael Kruegur. I'm toeing the wikipedia line - I expect him to do the same. mowster.
Venchi
The article's considerably improved, in that it's no longer copyvio. It still needs its ardor damped, though; I trust you can handle that? DS 17:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Boston Tea Party
Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category . It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 04:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
True heirs? True hogwash!
You did well to spot and excise the 'True Heirs' nonsense on the House of Stuart page. It's more than silly, though: I believe this addition to be a malicious hoax. Regards, Rcpaterson 07:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
PS I've just reverted some infantile corruption to the Oliver Cromwell page by a new user with the the IP code 220 239 237 3. Do you know how to flag this up as a vandal? Rcpaterson 07:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Thnaks for your advice; it's appreciated. For the example I had in mind graded warnings would simply not be appropriate. Have a look at the recent amendments to Cromwell and you will see what I mean. This is either a child, or a moron, or both. Rcpaterson 04:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Menier Chocolate
Have a little patience. As you can see at Menier family there is a lot of work to do to make it complete. - C. C. Perez 16:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
AfD Nomination: Eco-cement
Hi. I was hoping not to get drawn into this discussion, and have been watching with interest from afar. I did meet John Harrison a few years ago, and it is possible that I will do so again. Indeed, he has sent me samples of his cement to test and try out in concrete. I will need a little time to sought out my views. However, my general reaction is that the article is awfully written, doesn't clear state what the cement is, and "comes across" as advertising and a little self-praising.
Whilst I'm here, I'd just like to thank you for the good work you are doing on tidying up concrete and cement articles. Kpeyn 07:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Eco-cement blanking
Please be more careful about copyvio notices. The Eco-cement article was written by the copyright holder to the web pages in question, and is thus not necessarily copyvio, which is why I didn't include copyvio in the AfD. If the article had been written by someone with a username of EcoGuy or something which didn't match "John Harrison", I'd have hit it with a copyvio tag a week ago. But when AubreyJohnWestonHarrison posts an article which matches content on the web written by "John Harrison B.Sc. B.Ec. FCPA", one should assume some level of good faith. (Only some - the article is clearly vanispamvertisement, which is why I AfD'd it.) Argyriou 16:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortuunately this is not the case. Sure chances are that this person is correct BUT only if express permission is given in the following way can such material be included:
| “ | Copyright owners who submitted their own work to Misplaced Pages: If you submitted work to Misplaced Pages which you had previously published (especially online), and your submission was marked as a potential infringement of copyright, stating that you are the copyright holder of the work on the article's talk page helps, but will not likely prevent deletion. It is sufficient to:
|
” |
As such a person has to express permission in a way that entirely proves the copyright material is available for use. This can only be done on the original publication and by eamail to the foundation. In this case possibly WP:IAR may have applied but you never know and copyvio is one thing that requires procedure wonk as much as possible... --Errant Tmorton166(Review me) 21:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)