User talk:Biscuittin/Archive2

DYK nomination
Hi. I've nominated Portable engine, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know, where you can improve it if you see fit. EdJogg (talk) 02:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The DYK nomination has been selected, and is currently sitting in the 'next update' page! (Update is overdue, BTW.)EdJogg (talk) 11:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Partial Unbirthing Fetishism
Another editor has added the "prod" template to the article Partial Unbirthing Fetishism, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Partial Unbirthing Fetishism
An editor has nominated Partial Unbirthing Fetishism, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Compaq Presario S6700NX
An editor has nominated Compaq Presario S6700NX, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Systempunkt
I saw your comment on the systempunkt and I replied to it. I am not sure if it would be helpful or not, but I doubt that the article belongs in the hacking/computer security group. Though I am not sure which group that it should belong to...

72.227.231.178 (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

DLM AG
Hello, just to let you know that I think that the request for deletion and the spam label inflicted on this article are indefensible and it should be reinstated as soon as possible. If you need any help in trying to sort out this mess, then I'll be happy to lend a hand for what it's worth (Still seething).--John of Paris (talk) 17:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Not very well up on WP protocol, I'm afraid but we could make a start by looking at the history section and replace the quotation from the website which smacks a good deal of commercial blurb. There are one or two independent sources that cover the same things and we could have a look through them and see what can be done there.--John of Paris (talk) 23:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well you seem to have the most important links in the article already. There is a lot more info on the 5AT & Martyn Bane sites. The latter has some very nice recent pictures of the Schafberg: go to - then scroll down. And of course this site is a mine of information on Porta and his school. Also in: Chapelon, André; English translation by Carpenter, George: La locomotive à vapeur (Bath, UK: Camden Steam Services, UK 2000) ISBN 0 9536523 0 0, there is page on DLM that gives a good resumé on what's going on, although the ship engines (very important too) are only touched upon. There is also Waller's IMech paper that it is very important to be familiar with. Can't think of anything else for the moment, but will come back if I do. --John of Paris (talk) 13:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

RDHR
That was quite a while ago. Thanks for your reply. I also left similar messages at Talk:Crossrail and WT:LT. Simply south (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For help at west coast tas rail art - it is appreciated SatuSuro 02:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability of L Gardner and Sons Ltd
A tag has been placed on L Gardner and Sons Ltd 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  to the top of the page (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.  MisterWiki   do ya want to speak me?, come there!  - 21:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to History of measurement‎
Hi. Would you mind if I moved your new paragraph down the page a bit, to follow the more-or-less chronological sequence of the existing article? I might paraphrase Hants CC and incorporate information from other sources, e.g. OED and British History Online (University of London), now that you have discovered the topic for us! All the best. --Old Moonraker (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Change of plan. Now a new article (with acknowledgements for your original suggestion) on the old redirect page. It remains in the History of measurement‎ article in "See also". I'll probably come back to it in a couple of days, particularly if I can find a picture or two. Thanks again. --Old Moonraker (talk) 00:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment on my talk page, but all credit to you for finding the topic: previously a big gap in WP's coverage. --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Walter Chalmers
Another editor has added the  template to the article Walter Chalmers, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 03:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

CMEs
There is no need to place holdon on a proposed deletion tag, just on a speedy. For proposed deletion, what you do is remove the tag after you've explained why the article is OK, or fixed it so it is. For these articles, I think you need to say a little more to demonstrate notability or they probably will be deleted at some point. DGG (talk) 10:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Alien Abduction: Your related article
You forgot to mention that people who report being abducted are ridiculed regularly, such as being called crazy, full of shit. See the CIA related article: Robertson Panel which is about this matter, since "debunk" does mean ridicule, and ridicule means what is said here, and then some. 65.173.105.114 (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Can you place www.maar.us in both alien abduction articles ? This website references the aliens, such as the Greys and the Reptoids seen by abductees, witnesses. 65.173.105.114 (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You click on "Alien Races/Alien Species" in the list on that website to see the reported aliens. 65.173.105.114 (talk) 20:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that Alien Abduction is of little interest to me. Can you not make the necessary changes yourself? Biscuittin (talk) 20:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Kruse
Another editor has added the  template to the article Kruse, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 20:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Steam reverser
The existing steam reverser paragraph has only UK examples at present. If some of the US examples you are now adding to power reverse were powered by steam, as opposed to compressed air, would you like to add them there as well?. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Old Moonraker (talk) 19:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Modern steam article vs punctuation!
Hi BT. Seeing as how you created the article in the first place, it seemed polite to mention that JohnOfParis and myself have been discussing terminology issues regarding 'modern steam'. Our concerns are that, as the article could influence global usage of the terms (if only because WP mirrors will smear it all over the web) we need to be as sure as we can that the correct terminology is in use. The latest suggestion is that the article might be renamed Advanced steam technology, since this is grammatically less problematic! If you look at Talk:Modern steam, you'll see where we're up to.

Your thoughts in this matter would be most welcome (I suggest at Talk:Modern steam).

Cheers, EdJogg (talk) 10:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Water tube fireboxes
When I brought up this subject in the boiler article, I was not thinking so much of thermic siphons, but things like the Brotan and Emerson boilers where the two principles of steam production are combined.--John of Paris (talk) 13:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not familiar with Brotan and Emerson boilers. Is this something like a launch boiler with a single flue and cross-tubes? Biscuittin (talk) 18:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No, as far as I know they were normally applied to locomotives. The normal firebox water walls were replaced by close-fittining water tubes filled in with firebrick material. Steam was mostly generated by the firebox and the boiler barrel mostly took care of steam storage (this is generally the case, even with the conventional locomotive firetube boiler - a little-known fact uncovered by Chapelon, I believe). There is an excellent article on the history of the Brotan boiler in the Newcomen journal. It was much used in Hungay throughout the steam era. The American Emerson boiler was inspired by it. Anyway this was what I meant by the combination of the two basic steam- raising principles, but it needs expanding upon. Thermic syphons mostly improve general water circulation, notably when a boiler changes its angle due to change in gradient.--John of Paris (talk) 09:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. This is new to me. If you want to add it to the boiler article, please do. Biscuittin (talk) 09:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Categories
Thanks for tidying categories in the Kochen-Specker theorem page. I did not know how to do it properly. I also do not know which categories can be used. Probably `Hidden variables' and `No-go theorems' are not existing categories? Nevertheless, the Kochen-Specker theorem is a no-go theorem on hidden variables within quantum mechanics (these terms are widely used in the quantum mechanical literature), and I would prefer to refer to these (or perhaps to different circumscriptions of these concepts). I would prefer a sequence like: category (quantum mechanics) - subcategory (hidden variables) - subsubcategory (no-go theorems). I find a subcategory `theorems' less telling. Would it be possible to do so?WMdeMuynck (talk) 21:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have created your suggested categories.  If you know of any other articles that could usefully be added to these categories then please add them. Biscuittin (talk) 08:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Independent Republic of Zulia Article
See plis... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:190.79.104.197#July_2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.79.104.197 (talk) 06:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I have added a "Disputed" tag to Independent Republic of Zulia. Biscuittin (talk) 16:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Flow Injection Analyzer
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Flow Injection Analyzer, 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  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. Kkmurray (talk) 15:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I was going to redirect this to Flow injection analysis, but I noticed that there were no incoming links, so why not just delete? --Kkmurray (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Never mind on this one. I have since learned that 1) PROD isn't used on redirects and 2) orphan redirects are not considered a problem (here are the good reasons for delete: WP:R and here - WP:RFD - is where the deletions are discussed). Sorry for the bother. --Kkmurray (talk) 21:35, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Oldham, Ashton and Guide Bridge Railway
A question regarding the Oldham, Ashton and Guide Bridge Railway. I work for Oldham Council Highways and we are decommissioning a former railway underbridge by underfilling. We are looking to retain and restore one of the steel parapets. My question is would anyone know of the original railway company's colour scheme for painting of bridges and structures? Many thanks.Waltonhighschoolphoto82 (talk) 07:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Reboiler (disambiguation)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Reboiler (disambiguation), 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  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. Waterden (talk) 13:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Water Fuel Museum
Hi, you recently !voted to keep the article Water Fuel Museum in an Afd. I'm working on cleaning up the article and dealing with unsourced content, and was hoping that you could drop by and provide some input. TallNapoleon (talk) 05:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you've basically got it right, but it's definitely not economical--it costs energy. A lot of these devices actually claim to break the laws of thermodynamics, but there are some (the ones which run off of metal hydride) that don't. The problem with these is that the production process for metal hydride takes more energy than is released. TallNapoleon (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of water fuel inventions
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of water fuel inventions, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Poorly sourced, basically was a POV fork from Water Fuel Museum. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but it does not appear to be one now, as it has mostly maintained the same form and has a number of serious issues.

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  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. TallNapoleon (talk) 10:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Alien Abduction Trauma and Recovery
For your information, I have proposed that this article be merged into Abduction phenomenon and discussion is open. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

60163
Hi Biscuittin. Thanks for your help. I have tried to rewrite sections of LNER Peppercorn Class A1 to reflect a compromise point of view. I fear MacNee may not like this nevertheless, but I have tried to make it as professional as possible. Do you have any view on it as it is now? I'd appreciate your opinion. Tony May (talk) 23:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I find it hard to comment because there have been so many reversions. While we both disagree with MacNee, I think we disagree for different reasons. My reason is that he is presenting an opinion (that the loco is the 50th member of the class) as a fact. I think your reason is that the loco was never in BR service.  Both are rather subtle points which might not be understood by people who are not railway enthusiasts. Biscuittin (talk) 19:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree completely.  Stock lists are very important though.  There are additional good reasons as well of course, including article flow, professionalism, and consistency with other articles.  (Can you imagine when the New Build Patriot is completed having two 45551s?).  It just makes better sense overall.  Thanks for your help. Tony May (talk) 22:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I have made extensive comment at talk:LNER Peppercorn Class A1. Your opinion on that would be appreciated.  Also, could you enable email?  Thanks, --Tony May (talk) 22:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/LNER Peppercorn Class A1, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Biscuittin (talk) 13:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Biscuittin. I only hope that mediation is well done and does not result in a poor compromise version for compromise sake. Tony May (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll have a look into it. I don't want to overwrite the top of what you say though - where should I write?  My main complaint is the illogical listing of Tornado in the stock list, which was the thing I changed first.  Although my performance hasn't been perfect, I do think people need to be calmed down a little. Tony May (talk) 22:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

MedCab Request.
I accepted your Medcab request.Hereford 00:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Sorry I have been a bit busy with other things. Tony May (talk) 19:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you want to sign your comments there? --Tony May (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Here is the template I am using: --Tony May (talk) 16:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Peppercorn Class A1
Issues raised at WP:AN/I Mjroots (talk) 08:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments re the infobox. I've tried my best to find a middle way here. As I am of the opinion that Tornado is a member of the class, it seems to me to be absurd to have no mention at all in the infobox. However, I don't see that detail differences need to be included. They are far more suited to the Tornado article. Mjroots (talk) 11:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As I see it, the BR infobox is about the BR locos, the Tornado infobox is about Tornado, and they are completely separate. However, I do not wish to be obstructive so I am willing to support your proposal for the sake of consensus. Biscuittin (talk) 11:24, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

email
Mr Tin, I sent you an email, thanks. Tony May (talk) 01:04, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry for delay, I have now replied. Biscuittin (talk) 16:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)