User talk:The Literate Engineer

Las Reglas

I talk back to you on your talk page
I thus might not talk back to anonymous editors at all. Is this an obstinate way of encouraging yall to create an account and pick a username? Yep.

Now, go ahead and talk to me below: -The Literate Engineer 15:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sturmgrenadier]

hi, there is an organized campaign to save the above self-promotional vanity games-club page from deletion.... i'm wondering if you'd be willing to take a look and voice your opinion? normally i wouldnt care but (a) i hate organized campaigns from groups of users (especially when they have vested interests but dont declare them) and (b) when challenged about it, they suggested i try it myself! so here i am.... cheers! Zzzzz 20:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

It not a good start to nominate myself and not know how to complete the process. I added my name to the list, now what? I click on the link and it takes me to my user page. What am I doing wrong? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 02:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

W.marsh's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA. The final outcome was (30/2/0). I was particularly glad to see your support, considering how we met (I believe) during a conflict on AfD. Thanks again! --W.marsh 03:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki for Engineering

Engineering Wiki is a wiki entirely dedicated to collecting information about Engineering. The Engineering Wiki is in early development stages at the moment. We invite you to help devlope this wiki.

Hats off to you sir

± brilliant

Now I'm terribly confused. I can't tell if Hurricane Eric's text below is in response to my comment above (where I forgot to sign), but I think it is. Not to withdraw a compliment, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume brilliance with regard to whatever it is you are talking about, but the comment was for The Literate Engineer, regarding a prank I played by vandalising his page (sort of; see historyof his user page) and his response to that prank. My own fault of course; I left an ambiguous comment, without reference, and without signing.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:33, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RFA talk

Uhh thanks (a real motivational speaker there ;). I assume you're talking about me preaching about how Editcountitis is epidemic in RFA. I actually was surprised that there wasn't a huge discussion about it going on. Of course, it's hard to change human nature. I actually didn't start really becoming familiar with Wikipedia policy until current-admin NSLE put me up for RFA. It was actually so unexpected that I about had a heart attack. Even though my RFA failed with 24 supports, 11 opposes, and 9 neutrals; it really showed me how little I then knew about Wikipedia. I hope to try again and win someday. Sorry for the biography, I've been awfully talkative lately, I don't know what it is... Thanks again for the compliment! -- Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 05:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your evidence against Ben Gatti

I went through the evidence you submitted. Actually, you want to submit diffs like this one. I know it's a pain but you have to go through the history of the discussion and use diffs. Otherwise, the arbcom will ignore your evidence. If you need help in how to get diffs, let me know. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 12:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's just the Wikipedia talk:User Bill of Rights section and it isn't your fault. They moved the page, so instead of the diff showing up, it shows up like this. The page was moved to Wikipedia talk:User prerogatives. You want to go to that page to get the diffs for that section. Hope that makes sense. So it's not your fault. Just a quirk of the software. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 06:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. :) Good diffs, especially the one where he compares his "opponents" to the klan. He's good at doing that. On Price-Anderson, he often compared us to Hitler. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 17:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. The nuclear articles are where his bad user conduct first came into focus. What astonishes me is how he hasn't slowed down. he's just moved to other talk pages. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 08:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You sir are a God

Thank you. You put my sentiments much better than I ever could. You deserve either a kiss or a hug or both. :) --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 06:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Engineer userbox

You may want to add {{User degree|BE}} or whatever is applicable (see Wikipedia:Userboxes/Education, under University Degrees). It also adds you to the category. I'm a little concerned it may seem elitist, but I also like the idea that we can identify people with particular areas of expertise. -- Singkong2005 05:04, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sexual slurs2

I'm not sure if you've looked back at this, but right now it looks highly unlikely to achieve the consensus needed to delete. Although that's my first preference, a "merge" is pretty acceptable to me as well... but I notice that you've explicitly stated that you oppose that. Can you expand on why merge and redirect are ibjectionable? brenneman ^(t)^(c) 22:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xavier High School (Appleton,Wisconsin)

Hi!I need some help.I am trying to add Xavier High School(Appleton,Wisconsin)to the Xavier High School disambiguation page and I have no such luck.There is a high school stub for Xavier High School (Appleton,Wisconsin)-high school stubs in Wisconsin.Please,can you help?I tried experimenting in the sandbox.It is frustrating.Thank you-RFD 13:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC) Eureka!!!I managed to get Xavier High School,Appleton, Wisconsin added!!!Thank you for your patience and understanding.RFD 14:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why so few Wikipedians are engineers?

I am trying to understand why there are so few Wikipedians who are graduate engineers. Once I get a grasp on that, perhaps I may be able to formulate some ideas on how to attract more experienced engineers to become Wikipedians. It would be very helpful if you would respond to these a few questions:

Are you a university graduate engineer?
Please indicate in which of these engineering disciplines you obtained your degree:
1. Aeronautical or aerospace engineering
2. Bioengineer or biological engineering
3. Chemical engineering
4. Civil engineering
5. Electrical engineering
6. Environmental engineering
7. Mechanical engineering
8. Petroleum engineering
9. Other
In what year did you obtain your degree?
What attracted you to participate in Wikipedia?

If you would rather not answer these questions on your Talk page, then you may respond on my User talk:mbeychok page. Or you may respond to me via Wikipedia's email which I have enabled on my User:mbeychok page.

If you would rather not respond at all, that's fine also. Regards, - mbeychok 04:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response to the above survey. You may be interested in a summary of what I found (and which I wrote up some time ago) at User:Mbeychok/MRB's Survey of Wikipedian Engineers. I've pretty well decided that there is no hope of attracting many experienced engineers or scientists to become Wikipedia contributors. In my judgement, which I have no way to substantiate, Wikipedia is governed primarily by computer gurus who for the most part are still high school and university students with very little if any real world experience. - mbeychok 23:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

admin?

Can I assume that if I nominated you for adminship, you'd accept? Or is the "I'd like to be an admin" box on your userpage just a trap to lure the unwary? Joyous! | Talk 03:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thanks for your kind words on my talk page about your approval of my ALA comment. It made me REALLY happy-- thank you. --Alecmconroy 09:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your opinion sought at WP:LIST talk

I've made a proposal here, and am seeking feedback. Best,--Anthony Krupp 14:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of automobiles that were commercial failures up for deletion

Hi,

You have taken part in the AfD process for List of successful automobiles and voted delete. The decision was unanimous and the article was subsequently deleted. Now a corresponding article, List of automobiles that were commercial failures, is up for deletion for the same reasons. It would be only logicial and just to have them both deleted, so I cordially invite you to take part in the new discussion.

Regards, Bravada, talk - 09:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-- just wanted you to know that I responded to your comment here. Thanks, AdamBiswanger1 18:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

delete all lists??

I am vehemently opposed to lists as articles. My belief is that there is no place on Wikipedia for any "List of..." articles. Any worthwhile list can and must be folded into a pre-existing legitimate article. Otherwise all lists are to be deleted, although a few are worthy of reincarnation as categories. I've yet to encounter the exception to this rule.

What about the list of mathematical lists? Please look at the long discussion when it was (ultimately successfully) nominated to be a featured list, and answer ONLY AFTER you've VERY CAREFULLY done that.

Even without truly magnificent examples of that kind, categories are FAR inferior to topics lists. They cannot be organized; they cannot be moved without editing every page that they list; they cannot include invisible links to discussion pages (syntax: [[Talk:this topic| ]]) which cause the latter to be included when you click on "related changes"; they cannot include red links, which call attention to the absence of articles and invite their creation.

And what about chronological lists of presidents, kings, popes, winners of annual sports championships, etc. Or other lists that should be sorted in a way that is not alphabetical and can be understood only by those familiar with the subject? Michael Hardy 21:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so feminist and sexist

I've noticed in a number of articles you like to revert or say things that are toally sexist towards members of the male sex. Stating virtually that Females are the only victims of domestic violence. I find these comments so ridiculous its beyond belief. Men are victims as well you know.

Tyranny of the majority

Well, the phrase "tyranny of the majority" is pejorative. It does not simply refer to majority rule, but bad majority rule. That is why I thought it should be redirected to ochlocracy rather than majoritarianism. -- Nikodemos 05:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good point. I agree that we should redirect tyranny of the majority to majoritarianism. Alternatively, we could include it in the list of political epithets. -- Nikodemos 04:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligent transportation system

Dear Literate Engineer,

I have reviewed Intelligent transportation system article and have the following comments: First, it is WP customary practice to post a clean-up tag and then wait 3-5 days before commencing the actual clean-up deletion process. We don't want to throw out the baby with the water, and therefore Literate Wikipedians should be afforded the chance to review the good and the bad and suggest accordingly. If you agree with me, please revert the page back and let's allow for community consensus to elaborate on the findings and propose accordingly -- if nobody responds, then let's speedily delete. :) Best regards --Lperez2029 14:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Georgia Tech

I see that you're a student at or alum of Georgia Tech! I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Georgia Tech, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Georgia Tech. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 18:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biographical Dictionary of the Extreme Right Since 1890 (2nd nomination), which you contributed to. Steve Dufour (talk) 03:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello The Literate Engineer! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

D. A. Clarke - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 15:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of D. A. Clarke

The article D. A. Clarke has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

notable only for essays, no evidence of supposed significance

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. Scott Mac (Doc) 20:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Restoring the Lost Constitution

An article that you have been involved in editing, Restoring the Lost Constitution, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Restoring the Lost Constitution. Thank you Rillian (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Research survey invitation

Greetings The Literate Engineer-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should come hang out with us on the internetz!

Hi! I wanted to let you know that we have created an IRC channel for "countering systemic bias one new editor at a time", aka closing the gender gap! Come hang out at #wikimedia-gendergap if that subject interests you. We hope this channel can serve as a safe haven to hang out, talk about Wiki, brainstorming, women in Wikimedia, article alerts and foster friendships. I hope you join us! (And if you need any IRC help, just let me know!) See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 22:10, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Violence against men and women for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Violence against men and women 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/Violence against men and women 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. BDD (talk) 19:28, 28 August 2013 (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) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Geedead.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Geedead.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Archives