User talk:Polyparadigm/Pre-Nov 17, 2005

The following are comments on User:Polyparadigm's talk page from earlier than November 17, 2005.

Calcium phosphate

Hi joel. You suggested adding a text on CaP on the hydroxylapatite article. There already is a Calcium phosphate article. It is marked for a clean up so your efforts on CaP will probably appreciated there as well. yours Bedrupsbaneman 29 June 2005 15:44 (UTC)

Coconut crab

Thanks for the compliments and also for pointing out the BBC article about the smell of the crab. I have added a section to the article. Hope you like it -- Chris 73 Talk 06:50, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! TwoOneTwo 23:35, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

DU

Hi, thanks for your feedback and for chosing to discuss matters rather than just edit war. Very refreshing! I've removed my incorrect reasoning about kinetic energy and restored the paragraph about the better ballistics of DU projectiles over other materials. I've also altered the section to more clearly highlight DU's other advantages over, say, tungsten, including easier of production. Dan100 19:43, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Processes

So I saw you moved some stuff in processes, I've adopted industrial processes, but I'm thinking that there are at least two different categories in there... Come discuss...
~ender 2005-03-19 10:00:MST

Phases

Your example of oil and water is not very useful. Would you consider the superconducting phase of tin and the superconducting phase of lead to be the "same" phase? -- CYD

Free Market Conservatism

I notice you have created various articles on this without content. Someone has, pretty hastily, put them up for deletion at VfD. If you are intending to write them perhaps you'd like to say so, before they are deleted. --Doc Glasgow 14:12, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

These were actually intended as a challenge to a snarky commentator on Thatcherism. He complained that there should be an article of that title, so I started one for him...perhaps that was a bit misguided of me, but I'll let the community delete whatever it wants. The reason I created so many articles is that I wrote a few duplicates as a newbie, which made me a strong believer that redirects should go in before the rest of the article. I did the same for, i.e., cleavage (crystal) soon after its creation. Thanks for the heads-up, though!--Joel 16:37, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excuses

Sorry I didn't get back to your message, partly because of non-wiki constraints, partly because I admit I probably made a mistake in the move. I apologise. I found your article while trawling through Chem-stubs: Carbon-carbon seemed (and still seems to me) too ambiguous a title, especially when you are looking at a list including various carbon–carbon bonding articles... I agree that the parentheses are, in fact, redundant: thanks for removing them. Physchim62 10:26, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I think your concerns about bonding are valid, and anyone who types in "carbon-carbon" or "RCC" will still be redirected to the same page. If you end up making a page on carbon-carbon bonding, feel free to co-opt the redirect page, although you may have to compete with organic chemistry or something. It might be useful to link to diamond cubic and also to the RCC page if you end up making a page on that specific bond.

I've also taken the liberty of putting "composite material" in the first sentence of the introduction, which I should have done a long time back. I'm sorry I got a little snippy when I didn't hear back, and I'm glad you got around to responding after all. Happy editing!--Joel 21:51, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

polyethylene terephthalate

File:Polyethylene terephthalate.gif

Hi!

I haven't been ignoring your message; I've just been busy at work, and it's cutting into my important tasks on Wikipedia. Hopefully I'll be able to post a good structure for PET in the next couple of days. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 14:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done and done. Feel free to insert it into the article at your leisure; you seem to be doing a great job with it so far. It goes without saying that you may also remove it from your Talk page. ;-) --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 01:31, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

History of science -

Let's keep this discussion on your talk page. You wrote:

I would say that the preeminent source for the growth of knowledge is children's play, but perhaps that's a bit pedantic of me. Did you find the old wording too long and indirect?

Actually, what I objected to in the original wording was the phrase "natural science": I'm rather iritated by the pervasive assumption on science, scientific method, but most particularly on that article, that real science is natural science. I wouldn't be the first to point out that it's POV, I rather think that defining, documenting the methodology of and following through the implications of formal science is the way to proceed, but I couldn't resist that potshot. I won't rv any edits you make, but I'd rather you kept it free of the irritating, and unnecessary, assumption. --- Charles Stewart 13:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reversions on polymer pages

Thanks for helping me with the reversions for edits made by 65.160.88.7 - I was done about half of them, and then had to go off to do something else. When I came back to Wikipedia, I was pleasantly surprised to see that someone had helped me out. Thanks again, I really appreciated it! --HappyCamper 03:56, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure. It was a really quick process, and it felt righeous to undo all that spam before it could bring in any customers. Perhaps someone should alert a moderator, but I'm not sure how. Can you take care of that?--Joel 04:27, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I see...I didn't realize that you replied on your own talk page. Anyway, I've checked the contributions of that IP and I haven't seen any new contributions to Wikipedia lately. I've left a note on the IP's page to look at some chemistry Wikiprojects. --HappyCamper 28 June 2005 23:44 (UTC)

Galvanization

I don't have a very good digicam or photography ability, but I did find a very good example of visible galvanization spangle on a flat surface. See Image:Galvanized surface.jpg and Image:Galvanized spangle.jpg (this is a product of Simpson Strong-Tie [1], I believe this particular item is a 'flat-strap'). You can add them to whatever articles you want, or you may wish to ask someone with access to Ace Hardware and a good scanner to grab one. Splarka 22:26, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why, thank you! I hadn't thought of that source. I'll go ahead and add them.--Joel 22:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thermochromics

Thank you for noticing that. I made the edit on the fly! Jaberwocky6669 05:51, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Sure, any time. I just wish I could change all the websites out there that claim miso soup is nematic.--Joel 15:48, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Blondes

Thanks for your answer at WP:RD about Roman blondes. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking July 8, 2005 20:51 (UTC)

Phase diagram

Thanks for pointing this out to me, added to sk.wiki. Take care. --Palica 06:08, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metalworking wikiproject?

I've noticed you working on some metalworking pages... do you think a metalworking wikiproject would be a good idea? I've found the metalworking articles to be rather fractured, with many (such as endmill, which I've since fixed) not being linked to at all... some common structure and a navigation footer might go a long way towards the usefulness of these articles, as would removing some of the (often conflicting) duplication... or any other ideas? Thanks, Bushytails 05:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thin-film deposition

Thanks, I DO know how to set up extenal links. I just parked them there in a rush while at work and I ment to go back and clean them up, whick I shall do post haste. :) DV8 2XL 22:16, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cool beans. I guess I should never assume incompetence when overwork is a reasonable explanation.--Joel 14:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can do the video conversion for you

You can email it to me at (deleted to thward crawlers) and I can sort out the conversion for you. If the file is too big for your connection to efficiently send by email then you could upload it to FileFront (it's free and pretty simple). Whichever method is best for you is fine by me. :) Garrett^Talk 05:18, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

--Thanks, I'll send it to you shortly.--Joel 04:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The clip is up!

I've put it in the image caption for now, I'm not sure what the best way to link to it is.

Anyway, enjoy! :) Garrett^Talk 08:45, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikijunior Solar System

Thanks for doing those spoken versions of the articles. I've just finished Neptune and Uranus, so you can put those up if you want to. I think once we're done proofreading and publishing we can put a link to the spoken versions somewhere on the page.--Shanel 03:33, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Polyparadigm/honeycomb

Just to notify you that Polyparadigm/honeycomb has been listed for deletion. However, since you were the author (and only editor) of the page, I don't know if you meant it as a subpage of your User page. If you did, just tell us that was the intention and it won't be deleted, but userfied. Tito xd 00:18, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Polymers

I see you added your name to Wikipedia:WikiProject Polymers! :-) Welcome to the group! --HappyCamper 03:26, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bug zapper cleanup

I made a drive-by attempt to clean up that article that you tagged for cleanup in June. (The edit summary about the moth made me laugh.) Do you think it looks good enough to remove the tag? Joyous (talk) 02:01, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Therapeutic index

You should know that your comments on the therapeutic index of cannabis and of diethyl ether have been deleted. This is because they were inaccurate; diethyl ether is toxic, and to attribute a therapeutic index to a plant, rather than to the purified compound that can be extracted from that plant and from all the millions of other compounds present in that plant, is wildly misleading at best. Please do not do that again. DS 12:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]