User talk:Engology/Archive 1

Apollo
Hi - good addition to the Apollo astronauts article. However I've just been watching discovery and this sounds like a very close (exact) match to one of their programs. Please read the links above, especially those on copyright and reliable sources. The information you have added is valuable - just make sure you've said it in your own words, and that you cite sources where available. Thanks, and happy editing.  7   talk   12:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Engineering has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you.  7   talk   13:01, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''As well you added that Scott Altman, Michael R. Clifford and James C. Adamson were engineers. Do you have a source that is reliable and/or verifiable? If so please add it to the articles.'' Navy blue84 (talk) 21:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Adding Engineer to BLPs
I have that you are adding Engineer to the lead in a large amount of BLPs, mainly astronauts and US military personnel. Is there a reason for this? I note that a lot of these additions are to people who are not known for being Engineers, but for other acheivments. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Engology is, from what I can tell, a one-note crank. See my comments at this talk page; he stopped trying to add his edit there, but as you've seen he's been successful at sneaking it in everywhere else. YLee (talk) 12:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC) (deleted by Engology, then restored by me)


 * You don’t necessarily have to be famous or have extraordinary achievements to have your name featured in Wikipedia. These Astronauts were first and foremost *Engineers*, a fact that was instrumental in them becoming Astronauts and should be mentioned in their biographical details. The fact that some Astronauts were not well known for being test pilots does not appear to deter their entry in the lead in. I notice that you are not complaining about the fact that Astronaut Ellen S. Baker is mentioned in her Wikipedia lead in as being a Physician. In addition, Astronaut Sally Kristen Ride is mentioned as being a Physicist in her lead in. There are very many examples of this. We need a level playing field on this issue. There is a big decline in the numbers studying Engineering, internationally, and if Engineers do not get credit for their achievements, then things will not change. This will have dire consequences for economies, space travel and technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Engology (talk • contribs) 16:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I had reverted some of those edits. You say that it was instrumental in them becoming astronauts, but there is no where that says that. In some cases if you watch the crew bio's on NASA TV the astronaut's themselves say it was being a test pilot that made them want to be astronaut's or just a life long dream to fly in space. I think that it should be removed from the lead until it can be proven that being an engineer was what made them want to be an astronaut.--Navy blue84 (talk) 16:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Could it be that you have a hang-up about Engineers? Since you are so concerned, can I assume that you will delete the words * Physician* and *Physicist* from the lead in to Astronaut Ellen S. Baker and Astronaut Sally Kristen Ride and others? What about that level playing field or does this not apply when it comes to Engineers! I have been doing research over the years on Astronauts and have had personal contact with many of them and they all claim that being an Engineer was their main reason for success. You should respect the fact that other people have views that might be correct but not agree with views. Possibly the reason they are featured in Wikipedia in the first place is that they are Engineers, and being an Astronaut is incidental! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Engology (talk • contribs) 19:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "Personal contact" constitutes Original Research and is unverifiable. Please provide citations for your claims that these people engaged in engineering as a profession, not just that they had an engineering degree. Rillian (talk) 14:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please do not delete stuff from my talk page again as well. Navy blue84 (talk) 01:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. --SineBot (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

re: your message
Hi Engology, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page --     16:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Article moved
Hello - I have moved your article back from the main article space to your user space. There are a few problems with the article, as written, which I think you need to address. First - it appears to be a COPYVIO of http://www.engology.com/ which is not allowed, even in your userspace. Second, based on your username, you appear to have a COI in writing about the topic. Lastly, it appears to be an attempt to advertise on Wikipedia. Please feel free to reply here if you disagree. 7 00:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Engology


The article Engology has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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 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 will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.