User talk:Dwarfpower

Vault
Hi, just saying thanks for rewriting the article! :) -- intgr #%@! 23:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Blender not NLE?
In the Comparison of video editing software article, you removed Blender from the list. I can't disagree more. Blender has an extremely powerful NLE and compositor built into it, and has the feature set to compete with the other NLEs in the list. Any rationale behind its removal? --I80and 13:26, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Catia
Good work on the Catia page. After weeks of thought and investigation on the subject, the "External Links" section of many, many Wiki pages is not necessarily about encyclopedic knowledge. Often, the links are only vaguely related to the article. Therefore, I will once again add an external link to www.softwarelocations.com, a site that "remembers" where CAD software is used. In this case, the site has a Catia section, and is of interest to Catia users. There is absolutely no Catia bashing whatsoever, if that is a concern. What better place to reference Catia related information than on Wikipedia! (Please note, that the site is not a search engine, as you referred to it.) Merci.

SGI Virtu
A tag has been placed on SGI Virtu, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of SGI Virtu and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Utilisateur:Dwarfpower/test
A tag has been placed on Utilisateur:Dwarfpower/test requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. CultureDrone (talk) 15:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * C'est pas Utilisateur: sur le Wikipedia anglais, c'est User:. (It isn't Utilisateur: on English Wikipedia, it's User:.) —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

comparison od CAD for AEC
Hello. Thanks for your comments on the comparison od CAD for AEC. I've continued the discussion on that articles discussion page. --DuLithgow (talk) 23:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. You moved this page because there were lots of non AEC applications. The problem with content is that people keep adding software without knowing that it's not AEC software. That I (nor anyone else) have been quick enough to remove them again is a problem made worse by your move. I don't want to move it just now because some people are ocmplaining that I'm removing too many applications. But I would really appreciate you moving it back to the previous name - if you don't then the list will keep getting flodded with CAM, product design and other CAD - not a useful comparison. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 07:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

In response to your comments about the CAD / CAD-AEC comparison. I made the original comparison as you note for all CAD software, but quickly saw it overwhelmed with CAD software that no-one was sorting through. So I split it up. I agree that it's a shame if we have no general comparison - but doubt that one would be maintained or be very useful. Maybe we should abandon the whole project - it's a lot of work to keep it current and not many people seem to be that interested. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 14:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Updates to Caddie_(CAD_system)
Hello. I've made extensive changes to Caddie_(CAD_system), added some references, added a few facts, removed a bit of advertising :-) and removed factoids that I could not find references for. I also need your opinion on the features (see the article's Talk page).  I used Caddie 4 when I studied civil engineering in 1992, but I'm not an engineer now, so I'm not the ideal person to write about Caddie's feature set.  Thanks. -- leuce (talk) 08:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ethan Pringle
Hello, Dwarfpower. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Ethan Pringle, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. PureRED (talk) 19:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)