User talk:Peterhoneyman

Welcome!
Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, Peterhoneyman! Thanks for the contributions over on the Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center‎ article. Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience: And some odds and ends: Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: &#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;. Best of luck, Peterhoneyman, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 00:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the New contributors' help page, the Wikipedia Tutorial and the Manual of Style, and If you still need any help, you can always post your question at the Help Desk.
 * When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia and Assume good faith, but please keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
 * Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
 * Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

Regarding Sandbox1
Personal sandboxes do not belong in the article namespace. They belong in your user namespace. I will restore and move it to User:Peterhoneyman/Sandbox1, and fix your user page to point there. Jesse Viviano 16:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * thanks -- looks like i dropped a slash or sump'n Peterhoneyman 16:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Quechup requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Pilotboi / talk / contribs 19:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

"POV-pushing" in edit summaries
Hej Peter, I appreciate your work on the article, and agree with your reverts of Morton's addition. But I think we need to keep the edit summaries less inflamatory. It would be sufficient to justify your edit as re-establishing NPOV. WP:POVPUSH recommends against using the term. In know he really is transparent, but I have given up on Morton's use of words like "nut".--Thomas Basboll 09:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 'k, thanks Peterhoneyman 11:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Seffin
It might be of interest for you to know that Seffins paper appears to be controversial in that no one can find any evidence it has actually been written. The Journal of Engineering Mechanics not only does not intend to publish anything by him but have no record of him. Also, here is a picture of Dr Keith Seffen. He looks a bit young to have written such an important paper. It might pay to remove the Seffen paragraph from the CD hypothesis article for now. What do you think? Wayne 08:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * i'm unhappy with the situation. i wrote him twice &mdash; and to cambridge's press office twice &mdash; but have received no reply.  under the circumstances, i agree with you: seffen's paper is little more than an allegation and does not bear mentioning.  Peterhoneyman 12:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[http://winterpatriot.pbwiki.com/f/seffen_simple_analysis.pdf Progressive Collapse of the World Trade Centre: a Simple Analysis. K. A. Seffen] Wayne 01:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought you might be interested in this. :-)
 * Thanks from me also. I'll be looking at it over the next few days. Best,--Thomas Basboll 10:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm no engineer but it seems to me that Seffens paper is rather inadequate to explain anything other than that the towers fell and we know that already. All it does is confirm that the official theory is plausable without in any way ruling out the CD theory. A glaring error is that Seffen assumes the core was uniform, box columns 36"x16" and 4" thick for the towers entire height (he assumes equal resistance for every floor unless i misunderstood him), the lower 50 floors had columns 54"x26"x5" thick (8" thick at the lowest floors) with a 6" thick internal cross brace not to mention that the concrete walls were 17' (foot) thick. This should have meant increased resistance. I'm assuming you have engineering experience so what are your thoughts on the paper? Wayne 15:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW. You might like this unusual photo of the towers as it shows the core construction clearly. Wayne 15:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * A follow up critque on Seffens paper: Cambridge University re seffen Paper Wayne (talk) 05:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

New paper on 911
Thought you might like to read this. It has passed peer review and is expected to be published in around 3 months. Wayne (talk) 12:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited George Sugihara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert May. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

fixed it, thanks. Peterhoneyman (talk) 00:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The thread is Promotion, or useful links?. The discussion is about the topic Topic. Thank you. —Guy Macon (talk) 20:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Cà d'Zan in 2007.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Cà d'Zan in 2007.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 00:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm the content creator in this case. I'm a little rusty but I'll figure out how to attach provenance. Thanks. Peterhoneyman (talk) 20:32, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Welp, it looks like the jpg was removed anyway. That's shitty. Peterhoneyman (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)