User talk:Ytrottier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for your help! I hope you stay around for a while and help contribute some more. Here are a few pages that are good references as you get used to making edits on Wikipedia:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! When you leave messages on Talk pages or when voting, you can sign your name by leaving three tildes: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) leaves your user name and a timestamp. If you have any questions, you can look through the help pages, post a question at the village pump or leave me a question on my talk page.

Thanks again, and welcome to Wikipedia! -JJLeahy

Contents

[edit] Please don't just tag an article - explain.

You placed a {{Limitedgeographicscope}} tag on Wikipedia:Fair use. Could you expand on that? As in any volunteer project, helping to fix the problem will assist in getting it fixed quicker.

"Fair use" is a US-specific legal doctrine. It is relevant to the project since the Wikipedia servers are in the United States. Is your question to do with how far it is applicable for a non-US user uploading a picture originally copyrighted outside the United States? —Morven 21:02, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Willing to translate

Hello Yannick,

Dutch is my native language, and I'm willing to translate the dutch article on Auteursrecht (copyright). However, Wikipedia is new to me and I'm still learning the markup language. In case I haven't worked out the markup in let's say a week, is it agreeable to you if I provide you with the raw translation so you can process it further? Ivo van der Horst 28 June 2005 20:10 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind welcome on my user talk page, your additions to my user page have been most welcome. I've finished translating now, and the Netherlands copyright law article has been created. I've placed a Wikification requested notice at the top, but nothing else, like a notice telling the article has been translated from the Dutch article. A link on the Copyright page has been placed. Would you be so kind as to go to the Translation into English page and remove the request and create an entry in the Completed Translations part? Also, I'm no legal expert at all (I'm a biology student) and my translations of the names of rights and laws are probably way off. Could you take a look at that? Finally, translating was a hard but rewarding task, and I will study Wiki markup in the following days and take care of the page. :) Ivo. Ivo van der Horst 2 July 2005 00:44 (UTC)

[edit] User Categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Ontario page as living in or being associated with Mississauga, Ontario. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Mississauga for instructions.--Rmky87 02:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hollow structural steel

The preferred method of moving a page's content is to use the move tab (which may or may not be visible with the skin you are using) rather than a copy and paste. Small content shuffles are usually okay but a substantial content (moving a page and move) should have its history go with it. A page moved with the tab achieves this and also allows the articles talk page to go with it (which admittedly doesn't matter in this case).

This cut and paste move can be remedied although it will require some extra steps as you have now created the Hollow structural section page and it will need to be deleted first (with the new contents copied to a safe location first), the old page can then be restored and moved (with the tab) to the now empty slot, and your new edits incorporated back in. This will achieve exactly what you have already, but with the full contributors history available. — Graibeard 23:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, It's a big wiki and there are a lot of guidelines to keep track of, cut 'n' paste was one of the first mistakes I made so you're not alone; and yes, I'll let you off with a warning (as you put it :-) I don't mind fixing the page move so I'll tackle it a bit later. Happy editing! — Graibeard 01:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yawning Tears

See some clues in http://members.shaw.ca/hilaryking/Oldbrain1.htm and in http://www.nytimes.com/learning/students/scienceqa/archive/000330.html

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

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

Stubs
HSLA steel
Engineering mechanics
Professional fraternity
Negative pressure
Aspirator
Ductility
Vacuum chamber
Gauge (engineering)
Cold rolling
Bainite
Vacuummeter
Bundy pipe
Pearlite
Scroll compressor
Check valve
Austenite
Annealing (metallurgy)
Storage ring
Tool steel
Cleanup
Free electron laser
Hot cathode
Aloe
Merge
HOe scale
Japanese atomic program
Strength of materials
Add Sources
Tensiometer
Poland and weapons of mass destruction
Heat pump
Wikify
Metalworking terminology
Milbert Amplifiers
Hydropneumatic device
Expand
Samuel McLaughlin
Supersonic
Bell jar

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 17:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Privacy of e-mail

Thank you for your bit of support regarding the (non)privacy of e-mail. I was beginning to think the whole world was against me, for whatever reason they could dream up next. -- MyWikiBiz 01:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC) (Ytrottier's note: this refers to a discussion here)

[edit] Re: Aluminum alloy

I have some practical experience with the standards, I have a naval architecture degree and aerospace engineering professional experience, though I do computer stuff mostly now. I've designed structures in steel and aluminum, for spacecraft and boats.

ASTM does the structural steel standards, but all the ones I have seen for aluminum alloys are SAE's alloy specs. If you look hard enough on ASTM's website and so on, it resells the SAE specs. ASTM does some aluminum specs... for tubing, and wiring, and a couple of secondary things. I've never seen a structural alloy specification which was done by ASTM; all the 6061, 7075, etc all came from SAE. If you can find a counterexample, feel free, but all the stuff I am aware of and can find reference for is SAE. Georgewilliamherbert 03:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, FYI, A36 steel has a well defined yield point, rather than a 0.2% offset yield stress. There's a slightly stylized stress/strain curve for it on that page, and plenty of standard resources showing the same curve behavior elsewhere.

It's true that most steels have to use 0.2% offset (and most other ductile materials), but A36 is the obvious counterexample. And the most commonly used structural steel, so it's very worth mentioning. Georgewilliamherbert 03:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

My apologies on the A36 diagram, it's on Tensile strength. Wrong location to have pointed you to.

The ASTM construction steel standards are standards for composition and minimum strength. They don't specify a precise steel alloy, there's a range, but the properties are required to meet the standard. That's how structural steel is specified for construction. There are often several competing alloys within a specification, but they're almost always specified simply per the standard. The terminology is correct for structural steels. Georgewilliamherbert 04:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] *tip of the hat*

Thanks for the help. Is it just me, or is DreamGuy plain rude? InfernoXV 16:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

Hey. I responded to your question on Animum's talk page. *Cremepuff222* 14:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do

Howdy. Just wondering about this edit, and how it relates to Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Page naming conventions which specifies that "there should be just one disambiguation page for all cases (upper- or lower-case) and variant punctuation". Perhaps you know of a more recent/relevant discussion which overrides this? Thanks :) (reply here) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Quiddity, and thanks for raising the issue. No, I don't know of another discussion overiding that page naming convention, I just interpreted that guideline differently, possibly incorrectly. I thought it was just talking about situations like mm/Mm/mM/MM, (milli/mega metre/mole or people's initials or other things listed at MM,) but not where the acronym is also a word, like SAP/sap or RAID/raid. My basic logic was that the do disambiguation page was already so long as to make it hard to find what you're looking for, and someone looking for the acronym would be more likely to type it in uppercase letters. But perhaps wiser minds than mine have already considered this idea and rejected it. What do you think?--Yannick (talk) 00:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure, am still a beginner with dab pages. I'd say we need to ask at the guideline/wikiproject's talkpage. If you'd like to, please do, I'm busy elsewhere this week.. -- Quiddity (talk) 02:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] C. J. Phipps

Hi, too late now, but I do wonder why this page was disamb'd. C. J. Phipps was a notable theatre architect - known as C. J. Phipps - whereas the good baron was known as Constantine, or Baron Mulgrave - I would have thought a simple WP:HAT was all that was required. I have changed the many links to C. J. now to refer to Charles ... but that is not how he is referred to in any literature! I think that disamb should only be resorted to when there is a risk of confusion of a number of different objects, not to discriminate between two - your mileage may differ. It would however be appreciated that you don't leave 30-odd links pointing to a disambig page, it creates work for others. Cheers Kbthompson (talk) 13:14, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Answered on User talk:Kbthompson

[edit] Talk page

Why not discuss it on the article talk page? Include a link, add the information, add a reference to tha article. Why is this a personal issue between us on my talk page rather than about the article? I'm unfamiliar with this application of scroll pumps and the article on vacuum pumps is overloaded with information about blowing and sucking water. Still, why are we discussing this anywhere but on the article's discussion page where other editors could contribute and help improve the article? I am new to Wikipedia and don't understand why the discussion page there is not being used if you disagree with my edits

--The preceding unsigned comment was made by User:Amaltheus and answered on his talk page.--Yannick (talk) 03:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I will leave the vacuum pump alone. (Amaltheus (talk) 05:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Hybrid

Hi Ytrottier - I saw you moved Hybrid to Hybrid (biology) - fair enough in a way, but it should have been given more airing for discussion at WP:TOL before making this major move. The worst consequence is that there are nearly 2,000 animal and plant pages and several redirects which still link to [hybrid], and need disambiguation editing to change to a piped link [hybrid (biology)|hybrid]. I don't greatly feel like doing this tedious task. Do you? Personally, I'm strongly inclined to go back to how things were before, it would involve far less changing. - MPF (talk) 11:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The need for more discussion was answered on User talk:MPF#Hybrid disambiguation and the content discussion was continued on Talk:Hybrid.
Thanks! I guess on balance the move was the right thing to do, but it would be nice if someone can work out a bot to do the disambig edits (I don't know how to do bots). - MPF (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UNS

I just wanted to let you know that I think you are right about the ampco 18 C95400 thing. Based on the links you gave and a quick google search it seems pretty obvious to me that they are the same material. However, I didn't want to say that on the talk page because I feel that would have just made things worse. I hope that we all agree that just leaving it off the page is the best tack for now. --Wizard191 (talk) 03:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Siphon

Hi Yannick. Thanks for the invitation at Talk:Bernoulli's principle to participate in the debate at Talk:Siphon. I read the debate with interest and visited a couple of the external links. I have now added my thoughts to the debate. Dolphin51 (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)