Talk:Ecological engineering methods

This article reads like a childs school project. Discuss.

Offend non-native writer?
Taiwanese link to paper is broken - http://web.ent.ypu.edu.tw/main.htm/ This article is probably an English-language summary and paraphrase of a Taiwanese university paper - perhaps original research, since there are no footnotes in the article. A very commendably optimistic view of the future, by a non-native English writer. Should Wiki guidelines be applied to this article, relegating it to the dustbin? Should the author be guided to post it in the Chinese Wikipedia? Should we mark it up and wait for others to repair it? Will the author be offended? Should we care? SalineBrain (talk) 18:00, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Already repaired by a dozen
I see from the history that this article has already been repaired by a dozen different editors, so we have started down that track. However, I am surprised no one yet inserted an outline, nor any footnotes. Why would you think this approach has been overlooked by the traditional engineers? SalineBrain (talk) 18:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Broken link/Click-jacking attempt detected by NoScript on reference link
Results of Ecological Engineering Methods Prophylaxis Natural Calamity-1 leads to a list of links. Clicking on the document link leads to a click-jacking attempt detected by NoScript. I am unable to further judge the security of this link.

Results of Ecological Engineering Methods Prophylaxis Natural Calamity-2 is broken, leading to a 404 page not found (in Chinese).

I removed both links from the article. SalineBrain (talk) 18:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Basic physics
'Greenhouse gas capture' and 'traditional...' sections could do with a rewrite by someone with an understanding of basic physics and engineering. Currently theyre political rhetoric without genuine comprehension. Tabby (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Blank and Redirect to Ecological engineering
I've blanked the page and redirected it to Ecological engineering, which is probably intended to cover the same material. The body of this page consisted only of a badly written discussion of the hydrogen economy, which has nothing to do with ecological engineering per se, so there was nothing salvageable.