User talk:Some standardized rigour

Welcome!

Hello, Some standardized rigour, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- The Red Pen of Doom 07:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honour vs Honor

Please consider adding a comment at Talk:Medals of Honor (Japan)#Honour vs Honor. --Tenmei (talk) 20:52, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD of article you worked on

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corporate behaviour. Borock (talk) 16:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Turbulence modeling

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

Page has multiple issues. Information on page is already contained on pages such as computational fluid dynamics, turbulence, Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations, large eddy simulation, etc. Deletion of this page will prevent information creep, scattered information, and redundant efforts related to Wikipedia's coverage of turbulence and turbulence modeling. See Talk page for a vote on this issue.

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.

Hope this isn't irrelevant, but I noticed you edited this page, so I thought I'd give you a heads-up. You can vote on this at the Turbulence models talk page. --Charlesreid1 (talk) 10:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

English to American spelling

Hi Some standardized rigour

Thank you for looking so closely at some of the Protein family pages. However, I am going to revert your edits to Photosynthetic reaction centre protein, because the convention in Wikipedia is to retain the spellings relative to the language of the original author. This is an article of English spelling so it should remain with the anglicised versions of words such as centre.

thanks WeigelPen

Instruments used in obstetrics and gynecology

Hi, just to let you know, I declined the speedy deletion because the main article, gynaecology, does use the "ae" spelling and thus such a move is likely to be controversial and I see no discussion on the talk page (disqualifying it from being carried out per "non-controversial or consensual"). Please discuss the move on Talk:Instruments used in obstetrics and gynaecology before attempting to carry out the move. Thanks, Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 15:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That damn h.

At first I thought you were talking about the reverts you made over a week ago, I didn't even realize I reverted your reverts to either of the two articles. I didn't look at the history log, or I likely would have either tried to make a case for the switch or left it alone. I'm certainly not looking to get into an edit war with you, lol. Regardless, I don't think there is an ENGVAR issue, so I don't think RETAIN applies. In the RM people were primarily voting COMMONNAME, though I assume the closer decided to use RETAIN to likely avoid a protracted battle that would have ensued from that kind of controversial decision. -Kai445 (talk) 16:06, 21 December 2011 (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]