User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2013/October

Niels Bohr
Thanks for your review of Enrico Fermi! It was much appreciated. I was wondering if you would do me a favour and give Niels Bohr a review? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Major crackpot on Buoyancy
Hello! I see you are part of the fluid dynamics team at Wikipedia. Some have posted a long, nonsensical Atwood machine analogy for hydrodynamic buoyancy, that is only supported by a crackpot site. I'm sending this message to each member at the fluid dynamics team.Arildnordby (talk) 07:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

American Atheist Magazine
Hi - I see you were the one to redirect to American Atheists - thanks for your contributions. I also see your influences are Richard Feynman, Friedrich Nietzche, Karl Popper, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and thus you are my new idol... but no mention of Hitch? Oh well. Soon I will be making a separate page for the magazine, by the way. It's about time, and it deserves its own WP article. Regards, Geĸrίtzl (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed your redirect and made it a "genuine" article on the magazine, please take a look and feel free to edit, of course.Geĸrίtzl (talk) 21:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Template editor
Hi, I saw that you just received the protected template editor userright. Are there any full protected templates that you'd like to edit? Let me know and I'll downgrade the protection so you can do so. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Not for now no. I'm too busy to get involved on the technical side for now. Later in the year maybe. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

New REFBot
There is a proposal on Bot requests for a new REFBot working as DPL bot and BracketBot do. I beg politely for consideration. Please leave a comment if you wish. Maybe you could work on it like you did it with other projects? That would be fine. Thanks a lot in anticipation. -- 10:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Myron Mathisson
Thanks for clearing up my mess and for all the effort you put into it. Best, M&and;Ŝc2ħεИτlk 05:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

FA review?
Hello,

I noticed that you are very involved with the physics articles on Wikipedia, and I was wondering if you could help me out. Right now, I'm working to bring the article AdS/CFT correspondence to FA status. So far, people have had many good suggestions and many positive things to say about the article, but I'm having trouble getting people to support or oppose the nomination.

I was wondering if you'd be willing to take a look at it and tell us your thoughts at this page. Please note that you do not have to be an expert on the subject. The article has already been checked quite carefully by other reviewers, and at this point, I'm just looking for people who can check that it meets the FA criteria.

Please let me know if you're interested. Thanks. Polytope24 (talk) 15:24, 28 October 2013 (UTC)