User talk:Eynar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Eynar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Djegan 19:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] User Bicyclist

Excellent work! I fixed your spelling in the page name. Thanks! Tedernst | talk 23:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

hi Eynar -- I think you created this template from my userbox -- but now I've found a picture I like better, so I've edited my user page (rather than editing the template). I suppose it's not right to edit the template, since others are using it? Do I create a new template? Or does it matter? It appears there are only a few of us cyclists, anyway! best, bikeable (talk) 06:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 02:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

[edit] Conventional superconductor

It's been a while since I was in the field of superconductivity, but I have never taken "conventional" to be synonymous with "Type-I", as the newly merged Type-I superconductor article implies. Do you have references that define "conventional" in this way? Also, this merger makes the article self-contradictory, as it lists Niobium as an example (of type-I), and then states (correctly) that it is type-II. If there was a discussion on this matter, I apologize for not chiming in sooner, but I'm fairly certain that Niobium is an example of a superconductor that is both conventional (meaning explained by BCS) and type-II. Spiel496 (talk) 21:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry you didn't see my earlier reply. I don't know whether to have the conversation on one person's Talk page, or split it between them. Anyway, I just wanted to write to explain why I reverted "Type-I" back to it's stub version from before the merger. I meant to do this last night. The problem was the table listed conventional superconductors, which included some type-II -- niobium wasn't the only one. Spiel496 (talk) 16:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Heinz London

A tag has been placed on Heinz London requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Daltxn (talk) 21:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Type-I, Type-II superconductor images

The images you created [1] are very nicely done, but there are some aspects of them that are misleading. In particular, I don't think the Cooper pairs should be thought of as localized objects like you've drawn. I would avoid Cooper pairs completely; after all, the Ginzburg-Landau theory explains the type-I, type-II distinction without using the concept of Cooper pairs. The coherence length doesn't need to refer to the size of Cooper pairs, but rather the length scale over which a material can change from normal to superconducting. My recommendation is to go with a picture that contrasts what the magnetic field lines look like in the type-I and type-II state. For example, this website [2] has some good illustrations. I'm sorry to be negative about your picture, because I appreciate the effort. Wikipedia would indeed benefit from more images, so I hope you continue your work. Spiel496 (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)