User talk:Notthe9

Rae Welcoming Mike

Hey there, Mike. Fancy seeing you here. rae 22:27, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Bachelor of Science in the US

Hey, Notthe9.

In the third paragraph of the Bachelor of Engineering page, it is conveyed that a Bachelor of Science is much less commonly awarded than a BE, although your recent addition to the eduation section of the Civil engineering, along wtih anecdotal evidence from US civil engieering magazines, suggests that the BS is almost always awarded instead of a BE.

I think you are in an optimum postion to clear up this matter for me, what is the status of a BE in the US? --Commander Keane

I am a Civil Engineering student in the US. I have never seen a school offer a Bachelor's of Engineering degree here. In most job ads I see, reference will be made to BSCE as a requirement (bachelor's of science in civil engineering). At an undergraduate level in the US, you generally only see degrees of "science" and "arts" in various fields.

Looking online for examples of a BE from a respected university, some the the examples even included discussion where people assumed that others meant BS and started talking from that perspective.

I think I'll try to do something about the BE article, but I don't know much about the international climate. I might ask some professors I know who got Engineering degrees in other countries (Brazil, Italy, Kuwait) what types of degrees were offered, and ask for some input from other Wikipedians.

Mike Graham Notthe9 18:58, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Av

Hi, it looks like you originated the article on Av (month), so I was wondering - do you have a source on the folklore about eating pig meat? I feel a little stupid but I don't know anything about it, so I was wondering whether you could give me a source so I could work on expanding that section. It's especially interesting to have folklore about the consequences of eating traif. :-) Matthew Platts 23:02, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just messed with the names and such of a few articles. That's not my content. You may find the history of the article at "Ab." Here is a link to the history of Ab. Notthe9 15:07, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery

Thanks for the catch on Slavery Triona 05:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My honor. Glad to be of help here. Notthe9 05:49, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Imposter

Hiya... I haven't been back to the Fred Demara page since I started on Wikipedia last year. I fell short of the 'be bold' advice. Your POV comment encourages me to go back and redo the whole article. (Demara at one time belonged to the religious order that ran my high school, so he's always been a favorite character.) — OtherDave 20:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad if I might have been able to make an impact on you. I appreciate all your work and zeal for the subject matter. I found out about Demara just a couple weeks ago visiting the Texas Prison Museum in Huntsville, TX, which has a blurb about him and especially his time working for the system there in Huntsville. I was interested to read about him, and might try to check out The Great Imposter through Interlibrary loan. Thanks again. Notthe9 19:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious

I notice that you slapped an "unreferenced" tag on Young's modulus.

I also notice that you failed to provide any references your change of the symbol from Y to E.

Why is that? Seems pretty strange to me.

Of course, if talk page references count, and external links on the article page itself, then the article is not unreferenced. But none of that was put on the talk page. I'd think you'd want to set a good example, if you are going to run around slapping those tags on articles. Gene Nygaard 16:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I realize that I did not provide a reference in the article for my notation change to the article. (I did explain my motivation on the talk page, noting several texts.) There is, as best as I could notice, only one external link in the article, which still would tend to put it in the category, "This article does not cite its references or sources." Most pressing (it seems to me) would be that table, which tends to lack citation for pure data, rather than an explanation of some pretty fundamental principles. The table does have a source mentioned in the talk page, but that page appears not to be available anymore.

But yes, I realize I did not do any citation myself. As I said on the talk page earlier, "I will try to remember to do some work on [citation] myself." I do not plan on actually citing for the page that E is used (for this is a matter of notation), but would like to cite appropriate facts; I leave the explanation for that choice of notation on the talk page. I think this E notation is good to match standard practice (matching the symbols in the books I listed in the talk page, for example) as well as consistancy with other articles like Elastic modulus and Hooke's law. Notthe9 17:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Reading week

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Reading week. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reading week. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Big D

The article The Big D has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:NOTABILITY criteria

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Boleyn (talk) 09:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]