User talk:Biomedeng

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Breeze Card

Thank you so much for your work. It's much improved!!! --Jolomo 03:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MARTA reference material

I have a copy of "Sprawl City" if you would like to borrow it. Since it is slightly out of date but still a good source for some information, I would be willing to lend it to you. I organize the MARTA Pub Crawl, which is coming up November 4th. Even if you're not a drinker, you could drop by at the beginning to pick up the book. AubieTurtle 20:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the offer but I am in the process of getting a copy of the book from the library and hope to have it before November 4th. Biomedeng 00:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MARTA Article

Sorry for having to deal with that Kokayi guy. Much of the article came from you in some form or fashion and thanks a lot for that, it has starting getting better and better. As AubieTurtle mentioned, this guy just likes trouble, because he was involved in a lengthy arguement on the CfPT board on the walk left, stand right rule on escalators. Thanks again and hopefully this guy will go find some one else to argue with. Amazingracer 04:18, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Once the Kokayi situation is dealt with what else do you thing we should before possibly resubmitting the article for quality review? Amazingracer 05:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I got a copy of the Sprawl City that AubieTurtle recommended. There are a few useful statistics which I am planning on putting in the article (it cites 44% as the percentage of non Fulton & Dekalb liscence plates in MARTA's parking lot, which was previously deleted from the MARTA article because it had no citation). Unfortunately it tackles a lot of other issues outside of MARTA, and also was published in 2000, which limits its usefullness. I would like to see some more discussion of MARTA's history (since it's planned reach and its current state are so drastically different). Probably we should spin some talk off into a metro Atlanta public transit article, where we can compare different transit agencies in metro Atlanta. I'd also like to keep working on the station pages...one of my goals before the end of the year is to get more pictures of each station, and I also want to list connections to other transit agencies (CCT, GRTA, CTRAN, etc) on station pages. I could request fare collection information from MARTA to update the station pages; would that constitute original research? I am not sure what else is needed to get a higher rating on the article...can we get some feedback comments from the wikiTrains group? Biomedeng 13:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The fare collection would be great to have. If there was a way to make it publicly viewable to all then I dont think it would count as original research. So far the only thing I agree with Kokayi on is that the fare information needs to be cited on List of MARTA stations. My only thing about the pictures of each station is that on MARTA's website it says photography is prohibited in the stations and on the car, without written permission and that photos can not be posted on the internet MARTA Photo Policy. So that's my only worry there otherwise I would have already taken a picture of all the stations on my way to and from State. Now it does not say anything about taking pictures outside the station(ie. entrances). While im not new to Wikipedia, I still do not understand its inner workings, so Im clueless would get us out of B rating. I know one of the main things was that much of the information on the page was not cited, but that seems to be fixed now. And same with grammatical errors, I believe most of those have been fixed as well. Also the idea for a central Atlanta transit page is a great one, we could even go so far as to create an Atlanta Public Transit Project page like this one Wikipedia:WikiProject_Washington_Metro. This would allow us to have a dentral page to discuss and also flag articles for errors or what not. Thoughts on that?

I have a favor or two to cash in at MARTA, so perhaps I can work on getting the fare collection data without having to do a formal open records request, but I still feel as if it might be perceived to be original research since the data is not normally publically available. I had also noticed MARTA prohibits photography...perhaps a picture of the outside of each station would suffice? If MARTA prohibits the photography, does posting a picture against MARTA will violate wikipedia policies? We already have some pictures of MARTA on the article. As for the rating I say let's go ahead and get the page re-evaluated and see if the score has changed. I very much like the idea of a central transit article for Atlanta. Biomedeng 16:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I added the article to the assessment list. Forunately the list is much shorther than the mediation list so we should here back shortly. Also I noticed Kokayi hasnt been squawking about, did you know what the outcome of your reporting him was?

See 3RR Kokayi report to follow the outcome (looks like they are 2-3 reports away from mine). I guess he is taking a breather, especially since we stopped reverting his reverts. He probably thinks he has already won since we have been ignoring the ridestore issue. Biomedeng 17:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Im not sure where the pictures on the article actually came from, so for all I know they could have been taken with permission or probably even bummed from the MARTA web page. Thats interesting that MARTA owes you favors, mind if I ask how that came about? I will try and get some snap shots of the outside of some of the stations I ride through. Amazingracer 17:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't elaborate about that online, but just leave it at the fact I have a connection or two on the inside who would get me public information (like fare collections) if I asked nicely. Biomedeng 17:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Got to love those inside connections. :) Amazingracer 18:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linbergh RideStore

Thanks for getting my back on the Lindbergh Center RideStore. I don't understand what this guys deal is. I have reverted his edits and cited my facts. If he changes it again it looks like back to mediation again. Amazingracer 21:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I have warned Kokayai on his talk page about the three revert rule; if he reverts one more time I will ask that his account be blocked. Biomedeng 01:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I see he reverted the article again, and saw on the mediation page that you reported him. Thanks for being on the ball like that. I don't have class tomorrow, so to put the final nail in the coffin, I will venture up to Lindbergh and see what signs and directions are there. (I only ride from Arts Center to Five Points to get to State, but I have been to Lindbergh Center once and couldve sworn there were sign pointing to Marta HQ.)Amazingracer 03:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Someone has sent for the Cabal!

A Mediation Cabal case in which you were listed as a participant has now been opened. I will be your mediator in this matter. Please contribute at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-27 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 13:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MARTA cabal case

You closed the MARTA cabal case. I felt that when you accepted the case that me, AuTiger, AmazingRacer and Kokayi had all made our cases prior to your acceptance on the cabal page and the MARTA talk page. I for one did not respond after you accepted the case because I was waiting for you to respond to my concerns (I didn't have anything new to contribute to the discussion). In the interest of continuing to work on the article I would apprecaite it if you could review the case and the talk page and contribute some suggestions to facilitiate the discussion to help us through the impasse. Also AmazingRacer was part of the second cabal case that was closed, but he was never added to the first case which you chose to mediate. He might have more actively participated if he had been included. I sincerely appreciate any help you can provide. Biomedeng 17:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I have reopened it and you may join any parties you wish. However, if there is no activity in the next week I will close it again. Stifle (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Aryl hydrocarbon receptor

cross posted from talk page Wow, you know what, this is embarrassing, but I think I tagged the article very late at night when my brain was able to process very little information. As for what brought me there, I think I was removing links to a disambiguation page, and looked at this article and couldn't understand a word. I totally understand now, it's hard to baby these down too much without losing information. My apologies if that was bothering you - I've removed the tag now :) riana_dzasta 05:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Marta Kauffman; Bankhead (Atlanta); Margaret Mitchell House & Museum; Marta Abba; Magdalena Department; Coca-Cola headquarters; Marta Marrero; Marta Kristen; Marta Domachowska; Marta (football); Marta Suplicy; Martha Mariana Castro; Marta Bohn-Meyer; Five Points (Atlanta); Trees Atlanta; Marta Vincenzi; Atlanta Civic Center; Station-to-station; Santa Marta de Penaguião

Cleanup: Martenitsa; Downtown Atlanta; The Golden Isles of Georgia
Merge: Reykjanes; Limited liability company; The Technique
Add Sources: Interstate 66; Royden Rabinowitch; Source (river or stream)
Wikify: The Varsity; Reinsurance; Chord project
Expand: WSHC; Gypsum; Zebra

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 09:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page move debate opinions needed

Hi, user DIV (a chemical engineer), i.e. User talk:128.250.204.118, and myself (a chemical engineer) have been debating over the name of the Gibbs free energy article for seven months now. DIV is demanding that both the Gibbs free energy and Helmholtz free energy articles be moved to “Gibbs energy” and “Helmholtz energy” per IUPAC definitions, and is continuously rewriting all the related articles in Wikipedia on this view. According to my opinion, as well as others, e.g. 2002 encyclopedia Britannica, 2006 encyclopedia Encarta, 2004 Oxford Dictionary of Chemistry, 2005 Barnes & Noble’s The Essential Dictionary of Science, the 2004 McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Chemistry, Eric Weissteins World of Physics: Gibbs Free Energy, etc., Gibbs free energy and Helmholtz free energy are the most common usages. If you have an opinion on this issue could you please comment here. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 19:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Narek removing my sources, yet using same sources??

User:Nareklm is using the same site for "source" , yet he purposely removed my same source (same site armenainhighland.com images) with "no source" so you can remove it. Please check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tigranmetscoin.jpg ,this is the same site armenainhighland.com source. Yet he removed my images from the "same site" "same source" Ararat_arev

The source I also had put in "File History" please check at the bottom of the images

Here are my images I uploaded from same site as Nareklm uploaded Tigranmetscoin.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nkar3.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hurrian-AncientArmenian.jpg

75.4.200.127 02:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about and I am not familiar with User:Nareklm. I looked at the images and I am also unfamiliar with the subject. I am not an administrator or mediator, so I am not sure that I can be of any assistance to your dispute with User:Nareklm. Biomedeng 03:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:TECH

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Georgia Tech, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Georgia Tech. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Technology Square

I love the official pages you've found to reference that article. However, you keep removing an article from the student newspaper, The Technique, as spam. I haven't found an article for all of the other restaurants, but I assure you that the 'Nique doesn't print press releases. If the 'Nique says Tin Drum is good, then it really is that good. :) Aside from that, how would one go about expanding that article? I can't think of much "History," but the GT website about Tech Square seems to have a lot of information. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with the accuracy of the Technique as a source, but what I do have a problem with is posting a subjective food review (good or bad) on a restaurant when you are simply seeking to reference its existance. I would certainly welcome a Technique article talking about the opening of Tech Square and a list of the restuarants/stores. I thought it was better to use a reference that listed all restaurants and doesn't attempt to evaluate their quality. The food review isn't exactly spam, but the glowing Tin Drum review in my opinion taints the objectivity of the article because it looks like one restaurant is being advertised as better. (Also for the record I do think the Tin Drum has good food.) In general I prefer more factual and quantitative information on wikipedia.

A history section might be good that details the planning that went into the planning, land aquisition, and construction. I am sure that this kind of project was in the works for years. I'll look around the GT website and see what else I can dig up. Biomedeng 22:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Man, thinking of Tin Drum made me hungry :p —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MARTA article rating

I noticed you rated the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority article B-class. I've made quite a few edits to the article since it was last assessed B-class by Wikiproject rapid transit. I was curious to know if you independently assessed the article as B class or if you just rated it the same as the wikiproject rapid transit rating? If you had independently concluded it was B class could you give us some feedback on the talk page of the article? We are interested in improving the article to GA class. Thanks. Biomedeng 21:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

In order for an article to achieve a status of "GA" or above, it must be nominated and then passed at WP:GAC. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I may do that formal process shortley, but am not sure if it is even close enough to GA to nominate, since I am relatively new to wikipedia. I'm a little confused though as I asked my question to Roswell native...are you two the same? Anyway I still wanted to know if Roswell native (or you) read the whole article and independently thought the article was B class or if you were just basing that on the old rapid transit project rating? Biomedeng 23:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I happened to have his talk page on my watchlist, and went ahead and answered your question for you. Definitely not the same person. I haven't read the article myself, but I knew that pointing you to WP:GAC would answer your question. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing it up. I've been reading WP:GAC and still want to make a few more updates before nominating the article. Although it appears that nominations are a somewhat dynamic process (not just pass/fail, there is time for improvement during the nomination). Unfortunately many of the other regular editors of the MARTA article have not been around in the last 1-2 months, so it has been primarily me making major edits. While I have made improvements I am hesitant to go it alone in the GA nomination. I'll keep watching some of the GA nominatons for other articles to see if I can get a better feel for what else I can do to the article. Biomedeng 02:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Disavian, I'm just getting around to answering this and you saved me some typing. I am also going to post the results on the MARTA talk page from a automated peer review javascript. I found it helpful somewhat in reviewing Ty Cobb, which I have nominated for "GA" review (with help from Disavian). --Roswell native 05:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Station templates

Hello there. I've changed Lindbergh Center (MARTA station) to use the new standardized templates developed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains. Before I roll these out to the rest of the network I was wondering what you thought of the new look and had any concerns/objections/polemics. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 22:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I am going to cross-post this to the Talk:Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority page for others to comment. Biomedeng 23:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biomedical engineering

Hey Biomedeng, my old pal RCSIRCSIRCSI has taken back up to including rankings on the BME and BSBME articles again. Since I'm clearly the most vocal one against it, I think it may be a good idea to step back from this a little and let other people speak out...if anyone else cares enough. I was hoping you would revoice your opinion in the discussion since this guy seems to think having 3 frequent editors against adding the content is "no big deal". On the bright side, he hasn't called me any names like last time...yet. Thanks! -Cquan 17:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Good luck...I've had my share of edit wars and was even called a biggot all it did was burn me out on wikipedia. I've revoiced my opinion. Definately the raking should not go on the main BME article, and if it belongs anywhere it would be on the Bachelor's of BME article. Glad to see that you filed the sock puppet report (Bme diddy is a ridiculous username anyway). I like how you have improved both of these articles. Maybe it is time to start pushing for GA nomination for BME? I think the images need some work (need to find better illustrations of BME and the article subtopics) and get some more references. What do you think? Biomedeng 03:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I'm glad it all turned out ok...that guy was getting on my last nerve. I was actually concerned that no admins watch the page at all until Steel came in and fixed it. He's now my favorite admin, haha. Yeah I agree that the BME article still needs some work. I like some of the pictures, but the arrangement could be better (since they are just the entire right side at the moment) and still need some more cited statements to broaden the world view. Someone is gonna say something if our "international" view is the US, Canada, Europe and Australia. We may want to start gathering together the criteria and post a todo list on the talk page. Thanks! -Cquan 20:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I think a to do list is a great idea. Well it sounds like we are just missing Asia (and perhaps Africa/Middle East if they have BME programs), and I know there are biomedical engineering departments in China and possibly Japan as well. Anyway I think you have at least attempted to remove the blatant US slant from the article. I really like the pictures that are clearly engineered devices, like the artificial heart. But some of the pancreas pictures look like powerpoint slides and give me horrible flashbacks to sitting in boring undergrad lectures. I also think the picture should clearly correspond with the section it is next to. Biomedeng 20:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] knock knock; request for assistance

I see you're a science-geek :-) . I'm in need of a bit of science research assistance that may be at least somewhat up your alley. BUT it may involve some powerful POV issues re Taiwan, etc.

This doesn't seem to be directly in your field .. I'm into linguistics; what would I know ;-) ? But shouldn't be a big challenge, and if you can't/don't wanna do it, maybe you know someone who would...?

Here's the deal: this question about Taiwanese aborigines has been niggling at me for a while: Talk:Taiwanese_aborigines#Closely related to Malays and Indonesians?

I've seen links to several different references thrown back & forth on this issue.. I can hunt them down, if you like...

I'm not asking you to wade into the talk page... I dunno if arguments will ensue or not (hopefully not).. you can remain anon., or whatever...but if I could get someone to verify some kind of generalization about the most recent/authoritative research on this issue, I would be ecstatic...

I'll be watching this talk page for any answer you may give... :-)

Thanks for your time & trouble, --Ling.Nut 19:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

PS I've just asked User:Cquan as well... thanks! --Ling.Nut 20:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

PPS I've found someone who's willing to look into it — sorry for knocking on your door! --Ling.Nut 22:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Glad you found someone so quickly. Let me know if you need any help later on, although this is probably outside of my area of expertise. Biomedeng 00:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tempranillo

Thank you for your rating of tempranillo. AS a response to your comments Honestly, there are way tooooooo many wineries to make a somewhat inclusive list. Also, we cant make a list as to the best or better wines. THis would fly on the face of Wikipedia is not a wine guide]].--Charleenmerced ^Talk 05:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

[edit] Re: MARTA rail map

Apologies for the late response, I haven't been here much lately. Anyway, yeah, it shouldn't be any problem for me to make that update. I can probably have it done in just a few hours, in fact. :) –Pedriana (talk) 22:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Make that a few minutes. Done and uploaded. –Pedriana (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

Good morning (GMT time) and thank you for listing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority as a Good Article Candidate. This article has been reviewed in accordance with the GA Criteria, and I am pleased to say that it has passed all six requirements, and the article has been awarded GA status.

Kind regards,
anthony^[cfc] 03:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peachtree Road Race

On 11 February 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peachtree Road Race, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Leo Treitler

check What Links Here. Chubbles (talk) 03:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MARTA Peer Review

I reopened Wikipedia:Peer review/Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority/archive1 and left some comments - hope they help, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. Biomedeng (talk) 02:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] McFly peer review

Thank you for reviewing McFly (band) article! I made some comments and asked some questions about it :) -- Stacey _{talk to me} 21:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAC Assassination of Benazir Bhutto

First of all, thanks for peer reviewing the article, your suggestions were helpful. I have made changes to the article to eliminate the shortcomings you had indicated. I would really appreciate it if you could have a look at the article again, and make up your mind about whether it meets the FA criteria. The article has been listed for FA status, and your support would be helpful. If you find there are still any faults with the article, then you are welcome to make a comment at the FAC listing as well. Thank you. --Zaindy87 (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For all of your hard work helping review peer review requests that no one else has responded to. Given with respect and admiration (and thanks!), Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I have been trying to catch up on unreviewed requests and really appreciate what you do, thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)