Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fluid dynamics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:SampleWikiProject

Contents

[edit] Wikipedia:Science collaboration of the week

Physical oceanography is a current candidate on the Science collaboration. Vote for it if you want to see this article improved. --Fenice 07:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Shanel 20:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] May have trodden on some toes

I didn't see this project existed, I would have consulted you guys first if I had.

Anyway, I have split the Navier-Stokes article in two, removing the main article from the Millennium Problems category and infobox. (The new article specific to the Millennium prize is at: Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness). --cfp 16:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

To make up for the abscence of an infobox now, I've added a Continuum mechanics one, which you can see at Template:Continuum mechanics.

(The reason it is Continuum mechanics rather than fluid dynamics say is that Template:Physics-footer has Continuum mechanics as a broad field, so a box to unite everything within the field made sense.)

So far I've only added the template to the articles it actually links to, I'll delay doing any more (or someone else can volunteer to...) until I get some feedback.

--cfp 16:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 00:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★TWO YEARS OF MESSEDROCKER★ 03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

[edit] Suggested structure?

That was a really neat looking flow diagram, have you thought about including it into a suitable wikipedia article? Would be a handy tool for the readers to see. Mathmo Talk 06:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 18:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Venturi

Hi, I'm in the middle of cleaning up links to the Venturi disambiguation page. I see that you have included that page in your project. Perhaps, what you wanted was venturi effect or venturi pump? I'm not sure. Could someone please update the link away from the disambiguation page and towards the desired article? Thanks ʍαμ$ʏ5043 16:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boundary Layer Image

Boundary Layer
Boundary Layer

I just uploaded a simple boundary layer schematic that you might consider for inclusion in the boundary layer article. Syguy 19:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion: Capilarity

Capilarity (via WP:PROD)

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pneumatics

Hey there, not sure if this is still active or not but if it is, I reckon Pneumatics should be included within the scope of this project. Pneumatic and Hydrolic power should be put under the same umbrela, theyre both examples of fluid power. Theripper42 (talk) 17:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of TM Tecnomatic?

Hi guys. I've come across an article on TM Tecnomatic which needs a bit of attention - there seems to be at best a WP:COI issue. And I'm not clear on its notability - it seems to have a reasonable representation across Europe, but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the area to judge whether the company deserves its own article on Wikipedia. Hope one of you guys might be familiar with them? FlagSteward (talk) 16:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • I agree that it looks like self-promotion. I doubt notability can be demonstrated. I have posted an Advertisement banner on the most blatant promotion. Dolphin51 (talk) 01:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)