User talk:Engineman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello Engineman, welcome to Wikipedia!

I noticed nobody had said hi yet... Hi!

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

You might like some of these links and tips:

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing! --Alf melmac 12:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This May Help You

When you want to link to something on Wikipedia, you can just put two sets of square barackets around the words. For example, if I wanted to link to the USA article, I could just type [ [USA] ], without the spaces, to have USA. J Milburn 20:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, it is me again. You been my friend just entails us being nice to one another! Adding an article to a Category is easy, just add an internal link to the bottom of the page, to the category page. Say I wanted to add a page to the Weaponlord category (I only say that as it is one I made) I would type [ [Category:Weaponlord] ] at the bottom of the page, again without the spaces. You can create new ones by adding one that doesn't exist, then following the link to write a line of description on the category. Another thing, when you use a talk page, sign your name and the date after the writing by typing four of these- ~ after your name. That way, people can quickly get to your user page, when you make one, and your talk page. Which article was it that was going to be deleted? J Milburn 22:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Um....

Alphachimpbot didn't decide to add the cleanup tag to the page. It was added by somebody else. My bot only fixed it. Your references look great. I'd encourage you to add them to the article in question. Best Regards, alphaChimp laudare 18:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Which article was it, by the way? alphaChimp laudare 18:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I added the tag... User:Alphachimp's bot just follows me around fixing the fact that I'm too lazy and/or stubborn to remember to used dated cleanup tags rather than the older undated ones...--Isotope23 17:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles

I'm still going through the references... I've noticed it is essentially the same references on every page... so all of these references each cover all of these topics?

The only other criticism I have is that the articles could (and should) be cleaned up a bit and made more accessible. Right now, they are a bit difficult to understand for someone not already familiar with the topic. Please remember this is an encyclopedia and the idea is to give a broad overview that will be understandable to the majority of people reading the article. This should be a starting point where they can start before doing more indepth research on a topic. You might want to consider rewriting the articles a bit so the core concepts are more accessible.

I should finish up looking at the sources in the next few days (I'm a bit busy with outside things right now)... hang tight, The tags will probably be gone by this time next week.--Isotope23 17:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

Hi Isotope - I've tracked down most of the original articles / sources which I will have next week, so when I do, I'll go through all the Wiki articles and trim the references specific to each article. Trouble is at the moment I can't exaclty remember which bit covers which and there is some duplication. Perhaps when I've done that you could just weed out the unnceccessary ones? - Engineman.

[edit] Concerned about your topics

Greetings! I stumbled across the series of articles which has largely been edited by you, and have some concerns about them. The articles in question are:

It appears to me that these are largely documenting your own personal research. Unfortunately, I believe that it may be in violation of several Wikipedia policies and guidelines. For starters, original research is not permitted (for fear that Wikipedia would be overwhelmed by everyone promoting their own pet theories). Also, the terms as you use them appear to be neologisms -- invented by you and used by few other people -- which are strongly discouraged. I say all of this based on the fact that the terms produce very few hits on either the web or in print publications. The few hits that are not actually authored by yourself (David Andrews) appear to be using the terms in ways other than what you intend.

I'd like to give you the chance to communicate with other Wikipedia editors who are focused on sociology issues, to have them review the articles. It may be that these concepts are already present on Wikipedia, using terminology that isn't neologistical. Or it may be that despite my largely futile efforts to find evidence of these concepts beyond Wikipedia, they do in fact have general support within the field, and thus should remain in Wikipedia. But barring such possibilities, I'm afraid that I will need to flag these articles for deletion. Please understand that this is not out of any antipathy towards you or your ideas, but out of respect for the Wikipedia process. Skybum 22:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How the UK National Grid is presently controlled

Hello! Thanks for writing this: it's wonderfully detailed. Is this your own original work? More specifically, are you the copyright owner? If you could add citations or web links to supporting references for this text, that would make it even better. -- The Anome 19:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] February 2007

[edit] Somewhere over england

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Unfortunately, an article you recently created, Somewhere over england, doesn't conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new articles so it will shortly be removed, if it hasn't been already. Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do and please read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. —— Eagle101 Need help? 03:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] July 2007

Please refrain from creating inappropriate pages such as Lying through ones teeth. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --Finngall talk 22:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of CORNUIEPS

A tag has been placed on CORNUIEPS, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD g1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. ARendedWinter 12:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of CORNUIEPS

A tag has been placed on CORNUIEPS, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD g1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. ARendedWinter 12:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Coruans

An article that you have been involved in editing, Coruans, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coruans. Thank you. Katr67 21:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Claverton energy group

I have nominated Claverton energy group, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claverton energy group. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki links

Links inside Wikipedia can be done like this [[HVDC]] , which looks like this: HVDC. There's no need (and it actually wastes time) to give a URL with the en.wikipedia prefix. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IRG Articles - Re-writing for clarity

Hello, I think you are David Andrews, author of IRG Solution? I read your book some time ago and came across the wiki articles just now. I hope you don't mind if I spend a little time editing them for clarity and structure - do get in touch at my talk page anytime. Regards, Frank Frank Walsh (1962) (talk) 17:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Intermittent power sources - editing

Dave, apologies if my edit line seemed harsh, but you've been editing on WP for quite a while now. Look at the WP Manual of Style, wp:mos and other instructions on formatting. You put a reference in the text by using the <ref></ref> tags. It really isn't fair to others to edit like this and expect others to fix it for you.--Gregalton (talk) 11:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Intermittent power sources too

Hi

I've been following the debate on the Intermittent power sources talk page. On the one hand I think you might understand something that others don't... On the other I don't see your argument layed out convincingly. I quickly looked into Dave Andrews and based upon the link it seems you might work at a water plant of some sort. My basic background is essentially the same more or less. By that I mean we probably work on similar equipment and understand the common dynamics involved between plant systems. We probably share a similar vocabulary despite our borders. That being said I don't see where you are coming from with your intermittency argument. I've worked in the field for right about 10 years. I've never seen an unplanned outage. I've heard about them and I'm prepared for them but they aren't common. There is no solid comparison between daylight, wind or rain and a power plant. I completely agree that wind, rain and light can replace conventional power but the avenue of development follows a different course from the current path. If you intend to explain that intermittent power can work I'm all for it but you can't start the explanation by redefining itermittency. Mrshaba (talk) 07:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I appreciated the fact that the grid is operated with reserve capacity to make up for failures and I maintain that unplanned outages are a different animal than intermittency. A grid built around baseload plants that may fail and cause a blackout is a different grid than one built around wind or PV which have CF of 23% and 11.5% respectively. Again, in 10 years working in the field I've never seen an unplanned ramp or outage. Diablo had a 22 year average CF around 90%. I can see the comparison at the extremes between baseload plants and intermittent power sources but the nominal behavior is altogether different. The intermittency article should explore this difference. It should answer questions like: How have EU countries with high wind penetration adjusted their reserve capacities? Have they built more robust switching stations? Is there more demand side management? etc. Cheers Mrshaba (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I think you left me a message about this by mistake. Feel free to copy and paste it onto somebody else's page.
By the way, if you sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~, Wiki will automatically expand this to provide a link back to your user page. - Fayenatic (talk) 07:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
??? Strange... It says, Editing User talk:Engineman Mrshaba (talk) 16:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I've only worked in nuclear steam spaces for 10 years and am now out of the business. The old timers talked about the mid-eighties like it was the old west with scrams every month but it's been about 5 years since Diablo had one. Nuclear power has worked out the bugs. The 80-90% CF of nuclear vs the 23% CF for wind is the heart of the intermmitency issue. I'm no expert but from my perspective there's a fundamental difference between the quality of the two power sources. One is stochastic all the time... The other is reliable 99% of the time. Mrshaba (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sahara Forest Project

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Sahara Forest Project, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Whpq (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I moved it to Seawater Greenhouse and rescued it from deletion by adding links to 2 awards. However, please provide references for the section of the article about the Sahara Forest Project. - Fayenatic (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I see you provided a ref, but (i) it doesn't mention the project by name, and (ii) it's another wiki, and therefore not considered a reliable source. It would be better to remove some of the content about this project from the article, and add more about Seawater Greenhouses e.g. Where are these 3 sites? What was the project in Oman? with citations from the press or the Awards websites.
Also, the page WP:CHEAT may help you to get links right first time. Hope this helps! - Fayenatic (talk) 20:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talkpage message

Hi, Engineman. I am not a civil engineer. I am just somewhat knowledgeable about energy in general. The project you speak of is interesting to me, although I would think that many places in the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta would be unsuitable for wind energy generation due to the risk of killing waterfowl. There is very little suitable habitat left in California, so some species may be endangered. There is an existing wind farm in the delta area, the High Winds Wind Farm near Rio Vista. However, I looked on Google Earth and it is several miles from the water. Still, I am far from an expert and there may be areas of the delta that are suitable for wind energy. Also, perhaps you intend to build a small wind farm, in which case environmental restrictions would probably be less stringent. In regards to the structure of the levees, you may be able to find information on the Army Corps of Engineers website at www.usace.army.mil. Good luck, Kjkolb (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Amory Lovins

Hi Engineman, Good to see you plugging away at Intermittent power source. Perhaps these couple of links from Amory Lovins might be of interest... Johnfos (talk) 00:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)