User talk:Inventor

User page
Hi. You've moved your user page and user talk page into the "article namespace", where they don't belong. I'm going to move them back for you. If you want to change your username then please make a request at Changing username. Let me know if you need help. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 04:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The page move is complete now. Let me know if you need help changing your name. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 00:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. After you look over that guideline, could we discuss that concern here? I'd appreciate hearing your views, such as your reasons for wanting this particular page and any alternatives you might accept.

There are several options available for resolving this matter:
 * If you can relieve my concerns through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
 * If you decide to delete the page yourself, please add  to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it.
 * If the two of us can't agree on what needs to be done, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's user pages for discussion, which may result in the page in question being deleted.

My concern is that this page serves soley as self-promotion and violates:WP:NOT, WP:NOT and WP:NOT.War (talk) 21:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

@WAR: Every user page is a priori a "self-promotion” if one writes about himself, his hobbies etc.

Secondly it is not allowed for other users to destroy a user page. Who are you that you dare to do so? Why must just a user with the distinguished name “War” start a war? To balance the weapons you should give at least you real name.

By the way: if the content find a place in articles, I will erase such parts as I just did with the vane pump.--Wolfhart Willimczik - Physicist &amp; Inventor 02:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Ball piston engine (Wolfhart engine)
The article on the Wofhart engine was deleted. That deletion was confirmed just the other day, in Deletion review/Log/2007 June 15. So why did you recreate the article at Wofhart engine? It's swell that the German Wikipedia has kept the article, but each Wikipedia makes these decisions separately. Please respect our procedures and don't keep recreating the article until substantially new information is available. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It has been proposed "...to re-creation if better article can be written. -N 18:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)" ...and I have written a better article. Ergo, I was going along with the procedures here, but erasing a new article without discussion violets the rules here. --Wolfhart Willimczik - Physicist &amp; Inventor 01:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Can you indicate what changes you made to address the issues raised in the AfD?  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 02:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I dropped all criticized parts and improved the description – I think. I added animations, which are vital for the understanding. --Wolfhart Willimczik - Physicist &amp; Inventor 03:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The main issue with an AfD, and with that AfD in particular, was notability. Notability is demonstrated by articles about the topic. Animations don't indicate notabilty. So, were you able to add additional indicators of notability? ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 05:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Article draft (german) for new begin
Der Wolfhart-Motor, auch -Kugelkolbenmotor, ist ein Verbrennungsmotor mit kugelförmigen Kolben, der Bauart Rotationskolbenmotor, der von dem Physiker Wolfhart Willimczik entwickelt wurde.

Zielsetzung bei der Konstruktion des Wolfhart Kugelkolbenmotors waren vor allem kinematische Optimierung sowie mechanische Vereinfachung. Besonders für Alternative Antriebstechniken ist der Wirkungsgrad, der im Carnot-Kreisprozess beschrieben wird wichtig. Es wurden vom Erfinder Prototypen gebaut und betrieben, wobei allerdings der Betriebsnachweis nicht gesichert wurde. Lauffähige Nachbauten sind nicht bekannt. Die Patente sind inzwischen abgelaufen und es sind derzeit (2008) keine Aktivitäten bezüglich dieses Motors bekannt.

Geschichte
Die Entwicklung des Kugelkolbenmotors sollte die Vorteile von Rotationskolbenmotoren in möglichst einfacher Bauweise realisieren. In der Patentschrift wird von einem Vielstoffmotor ausgegangen. Der Motor wurde als Ersatz der in der Automobilherstellung der DDR verwendeten Zweitaktmotoren entworfen. Der Entwickler Diplom - Physiker Wolfhart Willimczik hatte damit kein Glück. Es wurden zwar Prototypen hergestellt aber der Motor kam nie in die Serienfertigung. Neuerdings sind die Entwicklungen im Bereich Kugelmotoren wieder intensiviert worden. Fortschritte des Maschinenbaus im Bereich Werkstoffkunde, Konstruktion und weiteren ingenieurwissenschaftlichen Fachbereichen ermöglichen neue Ansätze bei der Optimierung von Motorenentwicklungen. Auch diesbezüglich sind derzeit (2008) keine neuen Erkenntnisse die den Kugelkolbenmotor betreffen bekannt.

Technolgie
In einem zylindrischen Gehäuse drehen sich mit gleicher Drehgeschwindigkeit ein unten offener zylindrisch-hohler Außenläufer mit halbkugelförmiger Kappe und hierin innen anliegend ein kugelförmiger Innenläufer. Die Achse des Innenläufers ist zur Längsachse des Außenläufers geneigt (wie ein Erdglobus in Bezug auf seinen Sockel). Beide Achsen treffen sich genau im Zentrum der Kugel.

Von der Kappe des Außenläufers ragt parallel zur Längsachse eine Trennwand in einen Ausschnitt der Kugel. Dieser Auschnitt hat die Gestalt einer Orangenscheibe, die Trennwand erreicht dessen Scheitellinie und teilt ihn damit vollständig in zwei Abschnitte.

Bei der Drehbewegung ergibt sich nun relativ zur Trennwand eine Nickbewegung der Kugel. Dadurch besitzt die Anordnung links und rechts der Wand in dem Ausschnitt zwei wechselseitig kleiner und größer werdende Räume, die für das Arbeitsverfahren genutzt werden.

Beide Läufer umgibt ein feststehendes Gehäuse, das auch die Wellenlager aufnimmt.

Die patentierte Maschine gehört somit zur Kategorie der Rotationskolbenmotoren in innenachsig- nicht parallelachsiger Bauweise.




 * 1. Kugelkolben (kugelförmiger Innenläufer)
 * 2. Aussenläufer (zylindrisch-hohles Kammergehäuse)
 * 3. Gehäuse mit Wellenlager
 * 4. Brennraum
 * 5. Stange
 * 6. Einlasskanal
 * 7. Auslasskanal
 * 8. Kühlluft-Einlasskanal
 * 9. Gebläseflügel mit Kühlrippenfunktion
 * 10. Kühlluft-Auslasskanal
 * 11. Führungsschlitz
 * 12. Brennkammertrennwand
 * 14. Welle
 * 15. Schräglager des Kolbens
 * 16. Arbeitsraum

Kritik
Der Motor ist nur als Prototyp bekannt. Ein Funktionsmodell wurde an der Berufschule Bitterfeld gebaut aber nicht zum laufen gebracht. Der Betriebsnachweis wurde bisher nicht erbracht. Lauffähige Nachbauten sind derzeit (2008) nicht bekannt. Es sind keine Auswertungen zum Wirkungsgrad und Emissionsverhalten des Motors vorhanden. Erfahrungswerte zum Dauerbetrieb und Verschleißverhalten des Motors sind unbekannt. Ein Abgleich dieser speziellen Motorenbauart mit neuen Erkenntnissen des Maschinenbaus wurde bisher nicht vorgenommen.

Siehe auch:
Mit der Mechanik des Kugelkolbenmotors verwandte Maschinen sind Kugelkolbenpumpen auch Kugelkolbenmaschinen.
 * Kugelmotor
 * Alternative Antriebstechnik

Einzelnachweise
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. &mdash; e. ripley\talk 19:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

22:07, 3 June 2010 Bwilkins (talk | contribs) deleted "Smart pipe plug" ‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement (CSDH))

How can an inventor commit an "infringement" against himself? (Bwilkins likes the oil spill shell go on.) --Inventor 00:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Please do not restore the article until there are independent, secondary sources that report on the invention.   Will Beback    talk    00:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You may wait years of “independent, secondary sources” – and the oil is flowing. Do you want this? This article must be published now or never. We have day 46 of the oil spill and the oil is still flowing… Google took my article in Wikipedia already in the list. You take now over the responsibility that the existing solution will not be seen. You made a historical decision. You suppress the solution of a national crisis. --Inventor 13:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of our conflict of interest policy and notability guidelines. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Wikipedia is not your webhost!-- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Smart pipe plug, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. noq (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Smart pipe plug, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. noq (talk) 19:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people&#32;as you did at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Inventor, you might try an appropriate venue for submitting your idea, like this one] for instance. Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

No I am not a German. Your article was deleted because I found a duplicate copy on your userpage, and there are other articles already existing covering the oil spill remediation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:47, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Inventor
User:Inventor, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Inventor and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Inventor during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:52, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Advertisements
This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, as you did with Talk:Deepwater Horizon oil spill, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:57, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your edits
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MER-C 08:56, 13 June 2010 (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. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:05, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey!
I like your ball piston engine, absolutely brilliant! Have you only built a hand-agitated sample model or do you have a fully working example? Kindzmarauli (talk) 04:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but it is forbidden in Wikipedia to talk about my own inventions. It would be "self-promotion". Soon you will not see anything any more.--Inventor 16:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That is unfortunate. Yes, I see a bunch of your stuff is up for deletion. Do you have your own site where you have saved this stuff? I have had an idea for a new Wiki that would be called something like "OriginalWiki: The Original Thought Wiki", which would be the alter ego of Wikipedia. It would be only original research/thought and comprised of any new inventions, concepts, theorems, ideas, etc. that can be supported by research done by the person submitting. Discussion forums could be used by people to discuss the merits and shortcomings of each concept and perhaps contribute to their development, instead of here where people just use them to pretend they are on Facebook. I think there are many people out there with great ideas but the world doesn't know because they have no public and popular outlet or way to present themselves. It will take me some time but I hope to get this going eventually. If I do, maybe you will consider sharing your concepts there where they would be welcome. Best wishes. Kindzmarauli (talk) 08:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I would gladly use it. It would be a great achievement to put the entire knowledge of mankind in one spot and make it accessible for everybody. Technically it is possible today. In youtube etc running my inventions in videos. Only the description is missing. Otherwise such site could replace a complicated and expensive patenting process. The author of an article should have full control of his article. The entire site should be officially archived in the national or “world archive” (still to come) that every author can claim his rights. Not only scientists should describe a remarkable experiment or discovery he just made, but everybody who has something to show. For instance, there are many ways to bake a bred. Why not describe all of them? Let the user choose the most popular. (Perhaps in this way the Americans learn one day to bake a real bread.)

Wikipedia is a hopeless failure. Few Admins dictate the rest of the world what they have to believe and what not. This is actually a big step backwards in the stone age, where few people explained the earth is flat and in the middle of the universe. No admin is checked on his education, nor whether he is a member of the SSD/KGB or another terrorist organization, what is everybody is ask if he enters the USA! The Admins live in a law-less space. Nobody holds the communists back. So it is no wonder that first the German Wikipedia and now the US Wikipedia follows the guidelines from the KGB… --Inventor 21:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)