User talk:Engineman

Thank yous

Thanks for your nice find, which you added to Seasonal thermal energy storage. Coastwise (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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:

some General guidance.
Tutorial and the Manual of Style.
Find out how to revert, move and merge pages.
Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
Add yourself to the New user log and a regional notice board
Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
Use the Show preview button
Provide an Edit summary
Add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload
Take a look at Consensus of standards
Create a User page

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Which article was it, by the way? alphaChimp ^laudare 18:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.

Wind power claim

This seems somewhat speculative. Do you have a source for that? I agree that if wind power were available in the quantities and locations of current power supplies, then costs would be the same. But if windpower was available only off the northern coast of Scotland, costs would be much higher. I'm sure we could argue over this all day. However, Wikipedia is not a place for original research. If I cannot find a reference for this claim, I will remove it. Regards, Crosbiesmith 2:51 pm, 12 November 2006, Sunday (4 years, 1 month, 15 days ago) (UTC+0)

Crosbiesmith,

if you look under Triads in UK National Grid you will see how it is worked out. It is a matter of pubished informatoin that the present cost of the national grid is around 0.2p/kWh... let me know if you have any further problem with is.

Engineman....

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

February 2007

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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. A^RendedWinter 12:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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. A^RendedWinter 12:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

??? Strange... It says, Editing User talk:Engineman Mrshaba (talk) 16:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

What if the other 1% of the time includes a successful terrorist attack against a nuclear facility? When one considers the possible impact of terrorism, nuclear power becomes considerably more stochastic than wind, given that the worst-case scenario for a terrorist attack on a wind farm is that maybe some terrorists knock down a few turbines. A successful terrorist attack on a nuclear facility would have far-reaching environmental, economic, and political consequences. Even though nuclear reactor containment buildings are very solid structures, there are modern conventional weapons capable of penetrating multiple meters of reinforced concrete. --Teratornis (talk) 01:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Notability of Claverton energy group

A tag has been placed on Claverton energy group 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 article (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. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signing talk page messages

Hi - if you could please remember to autosign messages with ~~~~, which you can enter by clicking the little squiggle that is just to the right of the red circle around the w above the edit window at the end of your comment. Doing that puts in a link to your username but more importantly dates the message. 199.125.109.89 (talk) 05:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries

Hi-Can you please provide an edit summary, as your recent edits to Diesel generator at first glance look like test edits or vandalism with the strange terminolog (which may be clearer in Quotes), with a suitable reference to back up the terms used (Peak Shaving + Triad) - This is just a quick note as its the sort of edit to get reverted by bots looking for vandalism / test edits (they dont go through page histories looking at the whole sequencence of edits). For help see 'Welcome message' links at top of this page - Thanks for your contribution to expanding the article. - BulldozerD11 (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam in Chellow

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Chellow, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Chellow is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Chellow, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments go on talk pages

Hello, you added a comment to my user page. You should instead put comments on talk pages, which in my case is User talk:Teratornis where I moved your comment. --Teratornis (talk) 01:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of citation superscripts

Hi Engineman, this isn't the correct way to use a superscripted reference. It creates a sentence fragment: "A detailed technical survey of the technology, the issues and existing plants is contained in". (In what?)

If there is general information about a topic that does not directly reference the preceding text but is felt to be of general interest (as was the case here), then the correct way to do this is add an entry to the external links section. A superscripted number is for citations. Regards, — BillC ^talk 01:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Alternative fuel vehicle do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. http://www.claverton-energy.com/ Mion (talk) 02:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Electric vehicle. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. http://www.claverton-energy.com/ Mion (talk) 02:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Engine. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. http://www.claverton-energy.com Mion (talk) 02:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wind power variability

Thought I would let you know about this addition: Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy#Wind power variability. Johnfos (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this one?

Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security especially section 10 on "Intermittency and how to address it". Johnfos (talk) 08:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

uk transmission costs again

The reference currently pointed to by the article does not support the .2p/kwh figure. It indicates .7p. Discussion on Talk:National Grid (UK)#transmission costs again. -J JMesserly (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Energy accounting software

A tag has been placed on Energy accounting software, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 21:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion on Pump testing

If you do not know yet, a speedy deletion has been added to this artical. It does not seem to have any real importance. If you feel it should stay just add the {{hangon}} to the artical. If you add more information it will be fine.Purplebananasandelephants (talk) 19:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baseload?

Thanks for the info about US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Chairman Jon Wellinghoff stating that “baseload capacity is going to become an anachronism”.

Professor Brian Martin has said:

"... critics of renewable energy say that it can never supply baseload electricity needs. The expression 'baseload electrcity needs' contains the implicit assumption that such needs exist. This assumption gives great advantage to nuclear power, because it is only suitable for providing baseload electricity. A contrary argument is that people need hot water, transport, pleasant temperatures in their house, and so forth, and these can be provided by a range of measures such as housing design and solar hot water." [1]

-- Johnfos (talk) 19:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of List of unintended consequences

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as List of unintended consequences, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Passportguy (talk) 16:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Examples of unintended consequences

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Examples of unintended consequences, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Passportguy (talk) 16:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Passportguy (talk) 16:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

You are apparently creating articles that contain personal opinions and other inappropriate content. Such articles should not be created, as you have been repeatedly told. If you persist in creating such articles, you will have to live with the fact that other editors continue to tag them for deletion. Passportguy (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Links

Please do not add large numbers of unrelated links to articles. Have a read of [Wikipedia:Linking]] for a guideline about it. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

De Havilland Comet

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to De Havilland Comet, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Salt water load bank

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. NW (Talk) 01:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MPAS Service

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of MPAS Service, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://energylinx.co.uk/mpas_online.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I'd normally place a {{nothanks}}, you've been here a while and should know that copyrighted material is not allowed. Please write articles using your own words. I deleted the article. Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of ECOES

A tag has been placed on ECOES requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. WWGB (talk) 13:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added such as to the page Gasification do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. User A1 (talk) 04:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Levee.gif

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Levee.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 15:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Atiapu dam power failure

I think we already have an article on that: 2009 Brazil and Paraguay blackout. Thought I'd let you know. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 12:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of UK National Grid Sizewell - Longannet Blackout

The article UK National Grid Sizewell - Longannet Blackout has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOT#NEWS

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ironholds (talk) 04:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of UK National Grid Sizewell - Longannet Blackout

I have nominated UK National Grid Sizewell - Longannet Blackout, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UK National Grid Sizewell - Longannet Blackout. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ironholds (talk) 17:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gasification, gasifier, pyrolysis, pyrolyser

The article Gasification, gasifier, pyrolysis, pyrolyser has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unencylopedic account of various terms. The differences between these terms should be highlighted in their respective articles or in a more general article such as the waste-to-energy article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PDCook (talk) 21:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Seawater Greenhouse

I have nominated Seawater Greenhouse, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seawater Greenhouse. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Andrewjlockley (talk) 16:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Sahara Forest Project

I have nominated Sahara Forest Project, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sahara Forest Project. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Andrewjlockley (talk) 16:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sahara Forest Project, but please don't remove AFD notices before the discussion is closed. - Fayenatic (talk) 21:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seawater Greenhouse was kept, partly because of the citations that I had helped you with some time ago for technical awards, but there has been no decision yet on Sahara Forest Project. Hope that's clear, - Fayenatic (talk) 23:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proliferation of non-notable articles

You appear to be creating a series of articles about non-notable schemes. The references either don't work, are irrelevant, or are links to the proposing sites. Unless the articles discuss schemes that are under serious consideration by scientific journals, bodies or government agencies, etc., they have no place on Wikipedia. It is not a place for original research and pet projects. Andrewjlockley (talk) 16:57, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Desert rose project

The article Desert rose project has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Uncited apart from one primary source, tagged as OR and Advert since June, not encyclopedic, not distinguished from Sahara Forest Project or Seawater Greenhouse -- one article would suffice.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fayenatic (talk) 22:50, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Aerially Delivered Re-forestation and Erosion Control System

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Aerially Delivered Re-forestation and Erosion Control System. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aerially Delivered Re-forestation and Erosion Control System. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:2nd stage in lateral diffusion.png

Thank you for uploading File:2nd stage in lateral diffusion.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 09:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wind Power

Hi Engineman. A lot of the material you have added to the page Wind power in the United Kingdom is unsourced, unencylopedic and not formatted according to Wikipedia guidelines. Please remember that "Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own opinions, experiences, arguments, or conclusions". I have removed some of the material you have added. Abc30 (talk) 00:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment of Anaerobic digestion

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. You are being notified as you have made a number of contributions to the article. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Anaerobic digestion/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 06:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Euroheat & power

A tag has been placed on Euroheat & power requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. E Wing (talk) 01:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:First stage of lateral diffusion.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:First stage of lateral diffusion.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Haruth (talk) 10:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cogen Europe

The article Cogen Europe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable company or organisation

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted material used on Lundy

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Thanks for your edits to Lundy however I found that the information about the World War II plane crash had been copied from this page which is not allowed under wikipedia rules.— Rod ^talk 08:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Energy accounting software vs energy managment software

I proposed a merger of energy accounting software into the more general energy management software. I see that you have undone the merger with no explanation. If you think that energy accounting software warrants its own article at this point, please join in the discussion on the talk page of the relevant articles. Please participate in discussion to help improve articles, rather than just making changes without explaining. Thank you. Zodon (talk) 03:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schräge Musik article

Can you look over this article again as there has been a dispute over the use of a diagram which I contend is a historically significant image. Your views are appreciated. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See here. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hydroelectric power station failures

Were you planning on expanding/formatting/adding references to this article? Overall though, I think it should redirect to Dam failure or just the relevant section in Hydroelectricity. The three failures you have there can be merged into the section as well. As hydro power stations are the largest in the world, it is important but I don't know about an entire article on their failures, especially the way it is now.--NortyNort (Holla) 13:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Came for the same thing. I too think it should be redirected to dam failure. Well at least for now. Kind regards. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 13:57, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hi Engineman. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. I don't know whether you knew, but Wikipedia has a guideline on using Edit summaries. We're supposed to put something in the summary field for each edit - however small our summary is - to help other editors, down the line. Just one other thing - had you been considering archiving your talk page? You'd find it would help you and other editors to find a particular section, without having to go past the older ones. Thanks, Trafford09 (talk) 12:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Clamshell.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Clamshell.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:First stage of lateral diffusion.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:First stage of lateral diffusion.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you add a specific license for File:First stage of lateral diffusion.jpg? Choose one from the list. For example {{PD-self}} or {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}. --MGA73 (talk) 21:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to add the license from the aforementioned list - I've re-submitted it for quasi-speedy deletion. Skier Dude (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!

File:Verre de whisky.jpg

Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

Hey Bzuk (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 15:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Power generating equipment efficiency and carbon footprint

I have moved this article into your userspace, as User:Engineman/Power generating equipment efficiency and carbon footprint, to avoid deletion. Please see my comments on the talk page there. I encourage you to do further work on the article. DGG ( talk ) 08:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Intermittent energy source

Hi, Engineman. You participated in the discussion about the intermittent energy source and therefore I inform you that there is a discussion about merging Intermittent energy source and Variable Renewable Energy articles. Your opinion is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 14:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to History of the Panama Canal appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you. Mark Shaw (talk) 15:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Chellow

The article Chellow has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No coverage and no citations, so WP:GNG is not, and cannot be met; page is entirely WP:OR; page reads like an advertisement

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. E8 (talk) 18:08, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Natural grid

The article The Natural grid has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Neologism or novel idea, not widely taken up and not covered in reliable third-party sources

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 12:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

Your recent editing history at Gas engine shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. I see that you've added this now for a 4th time. Still uncited. Why do you think that spark-ignition and gas engines are the same thing? Is it that you think that gas engines and gasoline engines are the same thing? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:59, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of proposed scenarios and technologies for de-carbonizing Europe

The article List of proposed scenarios and technologies for de-carbonizing Europe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is entirely essay/synthesis and original research.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MelanieN (talk) 00:57, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I see that you removed the proposed deletion tag. That is your privilege. However, you didn't explain why you were removing it, or indicate whether you are going to do anything about the problem, which is that the article is synthesis and original research rather than a sourced encyclopedia article. Do you have any plans to change or improve the article to deal with this problem? --MelanieN (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, now I see your comment on the talk page. Do I interpret it correctly that you don't have any current plans to improve the article, you just assume it will happen eventually? --MelanieN (talk) 16:16, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of proposed scenarios and technologies for de-carbonizing Europe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of proposed scenarios and technologies for de-carbonizing Europe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of proposed scenarios and technologies for de-carbonizing Europe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ELEKHH^T 00:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest you visit the AFD discussion if you haven't already looked. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of proposed scenarios and technologies for de-carbonizing Europe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nuclear energy. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Offer of help

E, you've obviously spent lots of time on your article. Thanks. I predict that the AFD will close by sending your draft back to your user space. If that happens, I suggest you do this

1 Create Engineman/RFC Comparative decarbonization technology overview
2 For content

Explain you've been working on the draft (give link)
Succinctly list the six most important things you think your draft would accomplish
Ask whether your material merits a new article or would be best added to an existing article
List the existing articles you considered as being potentially relevant
Provide a Discussion section

3 At talk pages of each listed article solicit input and post a link to Engineman/RFC Comparative decarbonization technology overview
4 Give serious consideration to advice received on how to best focus your efforts (for which I heartily thank you!)

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of List of heavy vehicle fatal accidents involving brake failure

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of heavy vehicle fatal accidents involving brake failure requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:46, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of heavy vehicle fatal accidents involving brake failure for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of heavy vehicle fatal accidents involving brake failure is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heavy vehicle fatal accidents involving brake failure until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you were making arguments in favor of keeping this article on the talk page. That was appropriate when it was nominated for speedy deletion, but now it's been moved to Articles for deletion. It's confusing, I know. So you should post your keep !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heavy vehicle fatal accidents involving brake failure. Before posting, I recommend reading Contributing to AfD discussions and Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Other helpful information is at Wikipedia:Arguments to make in deletion discussions, and Wikipedia:How to save an article proposed for deletion#If an article is sent to Articles for Deletion and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lerwick Energy Recovery Plant and District Heating

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Lerwick Energy Recovery Plant and District Heating, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.shetland.gov.uk/waste/energyrecovery.asp.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sullem Voe oil terminal power station

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sullem Voe oil terminal power station, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/cofely-a-gdf-suez-company-to-operate-power-station-at-bps-sullom-voe-terminal-265807811.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:52, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sullem Voe oil terminal power station

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Sullem Voe oil terminal power station requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/cofely-a-gdf-suez-company-to-operate-power-station-at-bps-sullom-voe-terminal-265807811.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Flat Out let's discuss it 12:54, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am deleting the article. While the copyright concerns have now been largely addressed, the topic is already covered at Sullom Voe Terminal#Sullom Voe power station. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 23:39, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Three legged chair or table, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tribrach and Level. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Three legged chair or table

Hello, Engineman,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Three legged chair or table should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Three legged chair or table .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, TheLongTone (talk) 14:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lateral media for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lateral media is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lateral media until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mr Potto (talk) 13:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The IRG Solution

The article The IRG Solution has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NOTBOOK.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. reddogsix (talk) 15:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The IRG Solution

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The IRG Solution, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. reddogsix (talk) 15:10, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Engineman. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add sources to Flash spotting

Please go to GoogleBooks and find some sources to substantiate these facts you state at Flash spotting. You can instantly turn any gBooks URL into a fully-formatted footnote using http://reftag.appspot.com MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Flashboard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flashboard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flashboard until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CatcherStorm ^talk 14:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bath Trams

Hi, Thanks for your edit to Bath, Somerset about the tram proposals. Can I suggest that you need to provide a citation and that the detail might be better at Bath Tramways, because the article about the city needs to summarise a lot of information and the focus on tram proposals may be disproportionate.— Rod ^talk 19:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rod - I have provided citations now, there have been several press mentions and public meetings and trams along with transport generally is a burning issue so I think it should be there. The council may well fund a feasibility scheme. What do you think?Engineman (talk) 12:23, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Engineman. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

A self-published site advocating for the use of trams rather than park and rides is clearly not a reliable source for criticising P&R. If the reference does contain reliable sources, then you should read them (and also do your own research) and add them to the article. What you've done is the equivalent of citing another Wikipedia article - even if it contains references to reliable sources, it can never be reliable. If you can't access the sources, drop me a line and I'll help you out. SmartSE (talk) 15:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is illogical. The site is irrelevant, the point is that the article presents a rational explanation of why park and rides can be problematic and gives highly credible sources.

At the moment the present article is highly biased and gives a glossy account of how good pand rs are, which is a clear fallacy.

I can't be bothered to interject all the references so keep you biased article and carry on misleading people and a stupid policy.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Engineman (talk • contribs)

I'm sorry you feel that way, but the solution to bias is not to add even more bias. SmartSE (talk) 15:48, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Engineman. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Your edit to Sizewell C nuclear power station has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Rosbif73 (talk) 12:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]