User talk:Kierkkadon

Concerns about information on invention of iron smelting

[Update: Actually, I'm probably mistaken about this - it looks like the information in the articles refers to the first iron casting, rather than iron smelting in general. I apologize for the error. - RadiantRang (talk) 00:39, 26 November 2019 (UTC) ][reply]

Hi, I'm brand new to Wikipedia editing. I was looking at the article Timeline of historic inventions and I noticed the claim that iron smelting was first invented in China. That sounded odd to me, and I had once read an article about a systematic editing war between politically-motivated parties of the article on Taiwan. I had read that China had a long Bronze Age and then started casting iron in much more recent times than the Western iron-age.

I asked a native Chinese friend who knows a lot about history, and he was very skeptical of the claim as well. I started poking around and found similar information in Ferrous metallurgy and History of metallurgy in China - it may be in many other places.

I believe I have looked up almost all of the sources for iron smelting being first invented in China that is presented in those articles, and most of it leads to a very strange and contentious set of research by one Western scholar who has a joint appointment with a Chinese University, and sporadic, local claims of findings of ancient iron objects which had their "microstructures" studied to determine authenticity. I'm not an expert, but it really looks like almost all the work about this is presented as hypothesis or speculation, and the general agreement is that the research into early Chinese iron-working is early, and is speculative at this point.

It seems to me an extraordinary claim to any student of history that iron smelting, which is considered a key part of the dawn of an era in Western civilization, was first invented in China. Maybe the whole idea of the Bronze Age and Iron Age of Classical Antiquity around Greece and Rome is too Eurocentric, and progress should be put into a more international context - I really don't know. But I don't think that speculative information should be presented as fact - especially at the expense of a well-documented system of understanding that has a lot of evidence.

In any case, I'm hoping to make edits to these articles soon, and I wanted to let somebody from the Metalworking WikiProject know (I just learned about WikiProjects this afternoon) in case members have any advice or ideas about this. Please feel free to contact me on my page or by email - thanks very much! - RadiantRang (talk) 00:41, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Hi, you've done a great job fixing the issues I raised!

However, after looking over the article again I noticed one final small issue, please see the review page and tell me what you think.

Thanks! Retrolord (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Kierkkadon! I've come across another issue with the nomination, please check the review page. Thanks! Retrolord (talk) 02:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC

I passed your article Injection molding, congrats! Retrolord (talk) 02:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your article Industrial porcelain enamel. Looks awesome, great job! Osarius - Want a chat? 18:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Molemo Maarohanye

I would appreciate it if you actually bothered to read the edit history before you throw groundless accusations around. If you had done you would have realised that I had nothing to do with the creation of this page. Thank you. -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Centerless grinding

On 11 February 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Centerless grinding, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in centerless grinding, the workpiece is held in place by nothing more than the friction of both grinding wheels? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Centerless grinding. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 08:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Here, have this. Link the Courageous One (talk) 21:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Biomachining, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Micromachining (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:02, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Teahouse Turns One!

It's been an exciting year for the Teahouse and you were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about the impact we're having and the reflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of saying thank you. And, Happy Birthday!

	Teahouse First Birthday Badge
	Awarded to everyone who participated in the Wikipedia Teahouse during its first year! To celebrate the many hosts and guests we've met and the nearly 2000 questions asked and answered during this excellent first year, we're giving out this tasty cupcake badge. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

--Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 22:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your requests for reassessment

I had a quick look at Fixture (tool) and agree that it clearly has risen well beyond stub-class. I'm inclined to upgrade it, but for my ignorance on several points:

Am I qualified to rate articles that belong to a project I'm not a member of?
Should I join WP:METALS?
What criteria should I use to rate an article?
How do I apply a revised rating to an article?

If you can reduce my ignorance on these points, I'd appreciate it. Wcoole (talk) 00:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely qualified. It would help to have an idea of the rating trends for each project, but anybody can make changes.

That's up to you. You'd absolutely be welcome.

As to the other questions, you can find those answers here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Metalworking/Assessment

Thanks for taking an interest. —Kierkkadon^{talk/contribs} 00:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ezvid concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ezvid, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

STiki emergency

Your article submission Ezvid

Hello Kierkkadon. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Ezvid.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ezvid}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 19:04, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A historical perspective on moment in physics and mathematics

I have posted a comment in your article/discussion on 'moment'. Please consider my request to elaborate the historical perspective on the issue. Bkpsusmitaa (talk) 03:38, 25 May 2014 (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) 14:01, 24 November 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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Guanín (bronze)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Guanín (bronze) —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Anomalocaris (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Kierkkadon. 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]