Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 23:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedic tone

Dear Chemical and Bio enginieers! Lately there have been some examples of pages where chemists (in a non-engineering sense) and engineers worked together to write articles, which are very important in both fields. In two of these examples this has resulted in a clash between interests. The simple analogies, added from the chemist-side were described as 'cracking jokes' and 'comic strips'. Though I do understand that chemical engineering is more difficult to explain to the normal public, I do firmly believe that that is supposed to be the target of our work on wikipedia. If a subject is so specialistic, that the man in the street would not understand the article, or even would stop reading after the first sentence, maybe we should consider not even making it into an article on a wikipedia, but on specialised mediawiki's. This does not mean that we can not have these subjects here, but it means that the introduction of an article will have to be written in a simple tone, with simple mathematics, using simple schemes, and maybe even simple analogies, giving a good introduction to the subject. Later sections in the article can then be of the high-level, specialised talk which is needed to explain the deeper parts of the process. This will enable the man in the street to at least understand why e.g. hydrodesulfurization is so important a process. To continue with this example, this article looks like a typical example of a page where a non-chemist (and even a professor in human psychology) would not even understand half of the first sentence, let alone understand why this would even by an article on this wikipedia, I would even stop after the first two sentences, and I know why this is an important process, but this article does not invite to read on. And then a professor in chemistry has rewritten parts of it lately, and that has been quite an improvement!

I would like to hear some thoughts of you about this, thank you for your attention! --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I am a little unsure the purpose of your comment. I of course recognize that many engineering topics can be contributed to scientists and visa versa. Are you suggesting that we merge our wikiproject with a more organized "science" wikiproject? I am more interested in the biomedical topics, which are quite underdeveloped on wikipedia. Certainly I think that many non-engineers can help contribute, but as a whole the engineers on wikipedia are not very well organized and hopefully if we get the ball rolling on this wikiproject we can somewhat improve engineering-related articles, and at the same time involve non-engineers in editing as well.
As for your question about advanced topics, it is unfortuate that many higher topics in math, science, and engineering require a basic level of understanding. For example, my recent work on EDHF would probably fall into your category as to something a random person in the street couldn't understand. Yet, it is an extremely important topic in the cardiovascular research field. I for one would rather see lots of specialized articles on wikipedia in the hopes that the article or information I need that is relavant to my field is available. One way to improve things is to simply link to more general articles that may benefit readers unfamiliar with that field. Biomedeng 21:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
No, I am not thinking about merging with others, this project has full reason to stand on it's own, there are many good articles on wikipedia which can use the input of a chemical engineer. The way you explain EDHF seems a very good example of bringing it 'down to earth' I am just pleading for simple introductions, indeed with either many links, or with simple drawings, analogies, in such a way that all articles become understandable for the common public. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I completely agree with your plea for simplier introductions. Unfortunately I am not a chemical engineer, and thus can't directly help out with hydrodesulfurization. Biomedeng 04:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I would disagree with your "Man on the street" approach. The "man on the street" doesn't understand, e.g., Fourier Transforms, but the article is still extremely useful to those who are dealing with Fourier Transforms. I think a better approach would be to write the first paragraph of the article in language that could be found in an off-the-shelf encyclopedia (i.e. non-technical, "man on the street" language), but include technical details in the remainder of the article. That way, if someone needs to get a general idea of what something is, they can read the first paragraph, and go "Oh, that's what hydrodesulfurization is!" and continue what they were doing, but if someone wanted more of the technical details, they could continue reading. Charlesreid1 (talk) 17:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I also disagree with the "Man on the street" approach. Some of the things that we deal with as engineers can be very complicated and technical. I think that Charlesreid1's idea is a good one. Rather than dumbing down the technical parts to the point where it isn't useful to someone who knows chemical engineering, we should instead strive for a level that is useful to the "Engineer on the street", but perhaps not include all the details necessary to write a doctoral thesis. Jsmith86 (talk) 15:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of the direction of this project

I was a little bit hesistant in particpating in this project because both Chemical and Bio Engineering had been combined. While I am quite confident in my ability to better the bio/biomedical engineering projects, I am not confident in my ability to assist with chemical engineering project (I don't even know which chemical engineering articles to identify as being part of our project). Before things get going further, I definately need some assistance on the chemical engineering side of things. As time goes on we may need to re-evaulate the merits of lumping these two fields together. (I vascilate between spinnging the categories off seperately, or adding additional engineering topics to make a mega engineering wikiproject.) Also we need to think about things such as new stub categories, biographies of notable chemical and biomedical engineers, etc. I have only been on wikipedia several months, so to me the task of building this project from scratch is quite daunting. I would really appreciate guidance from other users on where to start and what has been successful on other projects. I can't do all of this on my own, but before we dive into this project we need a better plan. For example, tagging articles without a template that puts them into a category for this wikiproject has resulted in articles which are labeled as part of the project, but without a mechanism for other project members to locate these articles. Biomedeng 22:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have some competence in Chemical Engineering. The reason why I combined two rather different fields is only becoz of my interests. I confess I have hardly any competence in Bioengineering. I still hope that this Project works out. Else, if people insist, we can split up the project. But I though not enough people would participate in such a project. anyways, I am going to be on a sort of hiatus coz of my examination. Lets see what happens after that. Ketankhare 08:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Joint project is a good idea, it provides more stimulation. --Sadi Carnot 22:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions

As to suggestions, first I would create a list of all the related or sister projects and umbrella projects. As a guide, on how to improve this page, I might follow: Wikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biology, e.g. add a hierarchical definition header, put a paragraph at the top of the page, etc. Someone should make a user box to like the one below: --Sadi Carnot 05:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

This user is a participant in WikiProject Physics.
Here you go {{User WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering}} --Holderca1 15:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
This user is a participant in
WikiProject Chemical
and Bio Engineering.
Good work. --Sadi Carnot 23:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


Biomedical Engineering Categories

BMES recently published a request for the NRC to consider expanding the taxonomy of BME research doctorate programs [1] (see page 10). The list is as follows:

Since BME is such a huge and diverse field I think we need some smaller subcategories to build out on. I would like to propose that we use this as a guideline to define the field of Biomedical Engineering. Please share any additional thoughts or missing areas that definately belong in the BME field. Biomedeng 01:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan, let's use it as a guideline but not follow it exactly. I’m particularly interested in the first three topics. Some time in the distant future, I would like to see a full curriculum, textbook, and department of neurosurgical engineering, with focus on new technological developments and applications in the area of central nervous system bio-electrical artificial implants, microprocessor accruements, neuro-cellular phone implants, neuro-reference chips, etc. --Sadi Carnot 23:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Sadi, thanks for your work on the project page and creating the tables of important articles and people in the field. One concern I have about BME and bioengeering being seperate is that the terms are often used interchangeably (for better or worse) and it is often unclear what the difference is. Most schools will either have a Biomedical Engineering or a Bioengineering department, but not both. It is hard for me to decide if Biomechanics is either BME or Bioengineerng. Should we just combine those terms in the table? Biomedeng 02:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it could be possible that they are synanyums? Yet, WP has an article for each: biomedical engineering (very active page) and bioengineering (little activity); I think I’ve also heard about people getting degrees in biochemical engineering (medium activity)? If it comes down to it, we can make this a four category project. Let’s see what everyone else says, no need to rush. I'll add in an extra column to the table to see if anyone makes any contributions in the coming weeks or months. Talk later: --Sadi Carnot 02:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

FAC for DNA

HI there. This article is now a candidate for a featured article. Any comments or suggestions would be welcome on its nomination page here. Thank you. TimVickers 23:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Project image needed

We need to make a good image to put in the upper right hand corner of the project page, that represents a synergism of chemistry, biology, medicine, and engineering. Maybe some kind of multi-image picture? The Commons is a good place to search. --Sadi Carnot 23:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

As a test image, I added Hooke's microscope. Other good ones are below. --Sadi Carnot 03:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
File:Differential.png
Chemistry Biology Engineering Differential equations Artificial organs

Bohr model intro image debate help needed

Please comment here: Talk:Bohr model#Intro image debate to help reach consensus as to what “Bohr’s atom model” actually looked like. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 07:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Chemical plant, processes, design, etc.

To any chemical engineers, chemists, and anybody else who might be interested:

  1. I (User:H Padleckas) have expanded the article "Chemical plant" from what was about a 4-sentence stub to practically a full article. I then added this article to the list of important core chemical engineering articles in the Chemical and Bio Engineering WikiProject list. I tried to cover fundamental and practical aspects of chemical plants in this article, particularly those aspects which do not seem to be covered in other articles. Topics related to chemical plants which had their own articles were covered only briefly in this article. Considering this article is for general readers mainly and secondarily for experts, I did not include any mathematical equations or formulas. Beyond a photo of a chemical plant someone else placed in the Chemical plant article, there are no pictures or diagrams.
  • Does anybody care to review it?
  • I wrote this article based on information from my education and practical experience. Would anybody like to add some references to it?
  • Does anybody think there is any hope of someday turning Chemical plant into a feature-quality article? Such a feature-quality article would represent a more practical or applicable aspect of chemistry, where many of the topics sometimes seems to be on the theoretical or historical side.
2. Until a day or two ago, Chemical process was redirect to Chemical reaction, but "chemical process" is not mentioned in this article. Such a redirect may have been made by a chemist. In a general or scientific sense, one can take take a look at the words "chemical" and "process", then conclude that a chemical process is a method or means of transforming something chemically, whether natural or artificial. However in an engineering sense, a chemical process is an industrial process where chemicals or chemistry is involved. In this sense, the phrase "Chemical process" is widely used. I replaced the Chemical process redirect with a somewhat short article I just wrote explaining these possible usages of the term and the rest of the article was about the engineering use of the term. That information is practically duplicated in the Chemical plant article I (mostly) wrote. This situation can be left as-is or these two potential usages of the term can be incorporated into the start of the Chemical plant article, and Chemical process turned into a redirect going to the Chemical plant article. The Chemical plant article covers aspects of chemical plants other than chemical processes themselves, so moving the Chemical plant text to Chemical process with the reverse redirect would not be a good idea. Does anybody have any thoughts on this matter?
3. Previously there was an article called Process design which covered industrial process design. Although probably intended to cover any industrial processes, chemical engineering processes were emphasized. This article was renamed Process design (chemical engineering), and Process design was turned into a redirect to Design, which covered design of things but hardly covered process design at all. I am in favor of restoring the Process design article to cover industrial processes in general with perhaps a section on chemical process design. There is a sizable section on chemical plant design in the Chemical plant article, which this article could refer to. Does anybody have any thoughts on this matter?
4. The term "unit" (as in unit operations) is briefly "defined" in the Chemical plant article. There is no separate Unit (chem plant) article that I know of for chemical plant units; so I am considering making any links to this sort of unit go to the Chemical plant#Chemical processes section of the article. For example, there is a unit link in the Oil refinery article going to the disambiguation article Unit, where I recently added an entry for a chemical engineering type of "unit".
update - I have since fixed this "unit" link in the Oil refinery article as mentioned above. H Padleckas 19:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
5. The term "feedstock" is also briefly "defined" in the Chemical plant article. There is an article called Feedstock which covers chemical process feedstocks, but it is only a short stub, little beyond a definition. Should this Feedstock article be deleted and feedstock links go to the Chemical plant article instead, or should/can the Feedstock article be expanded?
update - Since the time above item 5. was written, the Feedstock article was speedy deleted, most likely because it was only a very short stub consisting little beyond a definition. Also just recently, an admin eliminated [all] the links to Feedstock in perhaps a couple dozen articles. To restore those links will require a bit of effort i. e. time, in case one were to want those links for a future expanded Feedstock article or to redirect to Chemical plant#Chemical processes section. H Padleckas (talk) 00:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
6. I also included one sentence in "Chemical plant" with a link to Fluidized bed. The Fluidized bed article used to be a short stub which has been converted to a redirect to Fluidized bed combustion. Fluidized beds are also used for applications other than fluidized bed combustion, so I think a generalized Fluidized bed article is appropriate, instead of a mere redirect to Fluidized bed combustion. I have restored the Fluidized bed article and added a tidbit more information to it, mentioning the distributor plate. There is also an article called Fluidized bed reactor with a fuzzy black and white diagram. In a course I took on fluidized beds, I learned they can also be used for applying coatings to solid items, in addition to uses as a reactor and catalyst regenerator. Therefore, a generalized Fluidized bed article is appropriate. There is an article called Fluidization, which may be redundant in view of a Fluidized bed article. Does anybody think the Fluidized bed and Fluidization articles ought to be merged?
H Padleckas 06:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
  • The Chemical plant article looks excellent. I am not an appropriate peer reviewer but it is consistent with my limited knowledge from casually talking to chemical engineers in the past about their process control classes etc. At some point in the future someone will come along and start demanding references to support the article. It would be good to throw in as much as you can while you are at it. If it is truly general knowledge a few college text books would be a good start. Well written, informative and easily understood. Good work. Keep it up.--Nick Y. 00:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Nick Y., thank you for your review and comments on Chemical plant.
H Padleckas 19:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
This article looks fantastic, Henry! Thanks for this, it's the kind of things I think kids should be writing papers on, people forget that virtually everything they own came through a chemical plant! I've felt for a long time that we are really weak in industrial chemistry, and this article helps to fill some of that large void. I did put in a little, but I could find very content missing. It matches very well with my experiences in industry. One thing, though, as Nick points out, these days one has to have inline references. Thanks for a great job! Walkerma 02:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
By the way, the questions you raise are a bit too engineering-related for me (a mere chemist) to answer. Maybe Mbeychok could give an opinion? Cheers, Walkerma 02:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Another couple of comments. 1. Regarding refs, I'm afraid I judged the content based on my personal experience too - but as a chemist, I have virtually no books at all on this topic, and none of my knowledge is written down. Heaton's "Industrial Chemistry" is one source I have, I'll see if that can help, but I have almost no engineering books. 2. It might be nice to include a little history, too. I may be able to help a little there, as long as I don't get sidetracked onto other things. Walkerma 02:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Martin, thank you for your review, comments, and input on Chemical plant. In your phrase above "but I could find very content missing.", I suspect you meant to write "but I could find very little content missing." If not, please let me know what you meant. H Padleckas 19:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Good work Padleckas, I have Douglas' 1988 Conceptual Design of Chemical Processes (a decent book), I'll try to add a bit with this reference. Talk later: --Sadi Carnot 06:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your review and input on Chemical plant. H Padleckas 19:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Article could use some references, but it's a good start for the article. Also, I feel that the article needs some significant expansion in the environmental impact area. This is a critical part of plant design, and will only become more and more important. Also, there was no information about the decommissioning or shutdown of a chemical plant. It's very important to focus on the impact of chemical plants. Charlesreid1 (talk) 17:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Oil refinery and Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium

I have added {{WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering}} tags to the Talk pages of both the Oil refinery article and a new Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium article I wrote, since they are both topics chemical engineers work on; for these Talk page links see Talk:Oil refinery and Talk:Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium. So many chemical engineers work at oil refineries, which are essentially large chemical plants, that I am considering adding Oil refinery to the list of 15 core chemical engineering articles on the WikiProject page. There are still 5 blank spaces left for core chemical engineering articles in this list. H Padleckas 03:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, make it so. Half of my friends went to work for petroleum refineries. My Felder and Rousseau (2000) devotes the first chapter to What Some Chemical Engineers Do for a Living, of which a survey was conducted of graduating chemical engineers at a large university. The lion's share (45%) went to work for large chemical, petrochemical, pulp and paper, plastics and other materials, or manufacturing firms. Nice article on VLE by the way. Brien ClarkTalk 04:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting project page

This project page Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems has some nice templates we might want to employ here? --Sadi Carnot 11:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The page looks really nice. I've always wanted to implement the assessment system that they (and many other WikiProjects) have, but have never really had the time to look into it. If you need help with implementing anything, I'll try to be of assistance. —Brien ClarkTalk 16:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
This one: Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology has some nice scroll templates we can use in the future. --Sadi Carnot 03:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

ChE timeline

Please contribute to this new timeline section I just started, if you can. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 15:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

On the Equilibrium of Heterogeneous Substances

Started monumental paper, please feel free to chip in. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 15:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Cast your vote at the energy article straw poll

A new user turned the energy article into a disambig page; we are trying to fix the problem presently. Please cast your vote at straw-poll overview, on the proposed solution. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 22:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Salaries

I do not feel this is appropriate in an encyclopedia entry. It is the sort of thing you find on a web-page advertising the profession, not a dispassionate look. How many other profession web-pages have salaries? In addition it is time specific and shows a limited American view of the world.Chemical Engineer 20:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, chemical engineering is often cited as the highest-paying degree, year after year. Subsequently, this is a significant peculiarity unique to this profession. Possibly, you may want to add references:
to explain this high-end pay grade. --Sadi Carnot 13:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject Engineering

Hi. I have created a temporary page for WikiProject Engineering at User:Tbo 157/WikiProject Engineering. Interested users should add their name to the list and are encouraged to help improve the page so that it is ready to be moved to the Wikipedia space when there are enough participants. Tbo 157talk 16:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The project has now been created at Wikipedia:WikiProject Engineering. We are currently looking for more members. Thanks. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 22:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Pseudoscience spamming

We just busted a long-term WP:COI spamming campaign that involved the pushing of pseudoscientific materials via use of sockpuppetry. The party responsible was a member of this wikiproject. See WP:ANI#User:Sadi_Carnot for more information (permanent link). Please check through this editor's contributions, as well as the sockpuppet's and fix any of the damage he may have caused. Thanks. MER-C 06:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Notice of List articles

Page(s) related to this project have been created and/or added to one of the Wikipedia:Contents subpages (not by me).

This note is to let you know, so that experts in the field can expand them and check them for accuracy, and so that they can be added to any watchlists/tasklists, and have any appropriate project banners added, etc. Thanks. --Quiddity 20:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Vacuum furnace merge proposal

Hi folks,

Hope I'm in the right place - apologies if not. I have a proposal underway to merge vacuum oven into vacuum furnace, and I'd appreciate an expert's verdict on whether this is a justifiable merge. Please chip in at the Talk:Vacuum furnace talk page with any opinions. Gonzonoir (talk) 17:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Packed Bed

Hi. I am currently trying to expand upon the packed bed stub article. I wanted to know if anyone had any thoughts on what specific parts of this article would be the most important to improve on to help this article get from a stub category to an article. I would appreciate any feedback. Thanks. Fxcenglish (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we need:
  • hystorical notes
  • more pictures of packing elements used on packed bed, and a classification of them, respect to geometry, :materials of construction, and a good table representing their physical properties and applications in which each of them are preferred
  • a good description of wetting phenomenon, and data of wetting ratio for all types of packings and fluids
  • a good description of void fraction, and data of void fraction for all types of packings
  • to describe more precisely the equations to calculate pressure drop through packed bed, and demonstrate them
  • a table and pictures representing advantages and disadvantages of packed bed column respect to the other contact systems.
  • a good bibliografy and references
--Aushulz (talk) 18:50, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Biomechanics of animal locomotion

I'd like help with a bunch of articles on the biomechanics of animal locomotion: Lead change, Lead (leg), Horse gait, Locomotion... See Talk:Horse gait#Group gaits. Thanks. --Una Smith (talk) 16:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

We have the template so lets use it

We have a perfectly good template to put in talk pages to let others know that the article is within the scope of chemical and/or bio engineering. So lets use it. Start putting it on other pages that would be good for chemical engineers to review. As an added bonus, it will bring other engineers to the project. For example, why is it that Heat exchanger does not have our wikiproject on its talk page? I remember spending a good portion of my heat transfer class learning about heat exchanger design. Jsmith86 (talk) 16:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I've got a bot (Chem-awb (talk · contribs) which can do that for your wikiproject. If you give me a list of articles to tag, I'd be happy to oblige. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Rating Articles by quality?

Would we be interested in using a bot to sort and catogarize our articles by their priority and status? I have seen it done with many of the other wikiprojects, and it seems to work quite well for them. Information about it can be found here--Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot Jsmith86 (talk) 21:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Merger between Bioengineering and Biological Engineering

As Bioengineering is listed as within the scope of Wikiproject Chemical and Bio Engineering, I thought I would mention this proposal here to get some feedback. It is my opinion that Bioengineering and Biological Engineering should be merged. Both articles cover what is effectively the same topic, and I believe that it is therefore frivolous to have two. Discussion Here. Thanks for your input! Gumbacious (talk) 07:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject banner does not nest

"WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering" does not nest in WikiProjectBannerShell. Any solutions? --Phenylalanine (talk) 00:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC) I found the solution:

--Phenylalanine (talk) 02:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

 Fixed by User:WOSlinker. —Ms2ger (talk) 08:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

"Blowdown stack" vs "flare stack"

Do you know what are the differences between "blowdown stack" and "flare stack" systems? I think the definition on the page blowdown stack is approximative about this. --Aushulz (talk) 16:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale technologies

Some articles in the Category:Oil shale technology, including the main article of this category Oil shale extraction, were tagged with this WikiProject banner. I would like to ask to check also other articles in this category as by my understanding they may belong in the scope of this WikiProject. I would like to ask also your assistance concerning the main article in this category, Oil shale extraction. In the nearest future I am planning to go forward with renomination of this article for WP:FAC and therefore, any assistance for reviewing or improving this article is most appreciated. Beagel (talk) 09:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Engineering traditions in Canada

Engineering traditions in Canada has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.196.229 (talk) 07:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed project of interest - organismal biomechanics

Hi all, I'm trying to start a Wikiproject to cover Organismal Biomechanics, and I was wondering if anyone else would be interested? Articles such as animal locomotion. gait, muscle, and similar would be our targets. See my userpage for a list of what I'm planning to work on, including some truly awful articles in desperate need of attention. See proposal page at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject_Organismal_Biomechanics. I'll keep anyone who signs up updated via their userpages until I get a project page made. Help of all kinds is appreciated, from brain dumps to wikifying, grammar and dealing with references. Mokele (talk) 01:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Wellman-Lord Process

There is a proposal to merge the Wellman-Lord Process into the Flue gas desulfurization article. You could discuss this here. Your opinion is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 19:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Oil shale extraction

There is a plan to bring the Oil shale extraction article to FA status and renominate it for FAC. Any assistance, such as reviewing and editing, as also as any critical comment is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 10:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Commons categories

Look at this discussion and give your opinion, please: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Process_engineering --Aushulz (talk) 01:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Jacketed vessel

There is any page related to "jacketed vessel"? Can someone help me to create one? I wrote on Italian wikipedia, but I don't know very well English one, in particular standard procedures. --Aushulz (talk) 13:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I've created Jacketed vessel. Make your changes there, I'll try & help with the editing. Can you link to the page on italian wikipedia? I will run it through a translator and see what information is on it. Waqqasd (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help. With the phrase "I wrote on Italian wikipedia" I mean that I "usually" write in Italian wikipedia, so I don't know particular rules of English wikipedia. Unfortunately, I didn't wrote anything about jacketed vessels on Italian Wikipedia, but I can do it in these days. Here is how you can help me:
  • control that what I write is correct and "easy to read" (I don't talk English perfectly)
  • collect (from Internet links, books, etc.) and/or write information about jacketed vessels
  • if you can take an image of a real jacketed vessel, it can be very interesting
  • search for translation of the term in other languages and see if other Wikipedias have a similar article
  • adding necessary templates on the jacketed vessel article
  • anything that can improve the article.
--Aushulz (talk) 13:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I've taken a photo of a jacketed vessel in our engineering yard. I need to clean up the background; if it looks okay, I'll upload it. Wikiwayman (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Great! Link it here if you upload it on commons. :) --Aushulz (talk) 04:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Synthetic fuel

There is a plan to improve the Synthetic fuel article to the GA level. In this process, there are still several issues, which should be done before renominating this article for GAN. All members of the WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering are invited to participate in the discussion about the article improvement and to assist improving it. Beagel (talk) 08:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Filters and filtration

Filters and filtration seem to be quite neglected on Wikipedia. I have recently had a go at updating the following pages, but I now feel that there is just too much to do!

Some work done:

Help needed

My old lecture notes and text books are pretty much out of date. Does anyone have up to date pictures and reference works to improve these articles? Wikiwayman (talk) 14:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

There is a debate about merging sand filter with slow sand filter. Please discuss it on the talk pages. Wikiwayman (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
I added an image in Rotary vacuum-drum filter, but it's written in Italian. I'll translate it in these days. --Aushulz (talk) 04:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 Done I translated the rotary drum filter's image. --Aushulz (talk) 01:44, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
There is Tilting pan filter, too. We have it in Italian Wikipedia: it:Filtro a giostra. I'll translate it, as I can (drawing the scheme of this filter is more difficult to me, it maybe a 3D scheme). --Aushulz (talk) 04:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I created a picture of tilting pan filter: File:Tilting pan filter.svg. Aushulz aka --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 17:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Petroleum product and Petrochemical and ...

I propose to

  • rework petrochemical, focusing less on a list and more on a tree diagram of the products. The emphasis would shift to the basic chemicals produced from petroleum following by the large scale materials from these few,
  • shift material from Petroleum product to oil refinery and the section "Petrochemicals products" in petrochemical,
  • convert Petroleum product (which is not a defined term) into a redirect to petrochemical and which directly duplicates the section "Petrochemicals products" in Petrochemical.

Suggestions, comments, and criticisms are welcome. It does not appear that any editors are very invested in or paying much attention to these articles.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Smokefoot, but I have some doubt regard to the conversion of the list of the page Petrochemical to a diagram, because at the moment the list ("List of significant petrochemicals and their derivatives") include a lot of information for each substance/product that can be loose during conversion.
To create the diagram we can use Template:Familytree, that permits to click on each product name. An example of this use of Template:Familytree is in it.wikipedia, in particular here and here. What about it?
--Aushulz (talk) 16:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Grazie for the family tree concept, wonderful! Some (or a lot of the information on Petrochemicals are not really petrochemicals, so I propose that we drop some info. But I will be sure to check with this group before implementing. This project could take some time.--Smokefoot (talk) 00:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
I create 2 schemes with template:Familytree in the page User:Aushulz/Sandbox: the first with complete information and the second with only links. Which kind of schemes do you prefer? --Aushulz (talk) 03:08, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
I would very much prefer a Petrochemicals flowchart showing chemical structures and information. I was about to propose that information from a number of flowcharts in a website Smokefoot showed be merged together into one giant flowchart showing the various petrochemicals in that website/page. I did not realize somebody was thinking of working on it then, and I was too busy to bring up my proposal sooner. H Padleckas (talk) 08:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Commercial content on Thermal_oxidizer#Catalytic_oxidizer

Hey guys,

I just wanted to report that the references on the page stated in the title of this talk are ALL commercial and should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Airpollutioncontrol (talk • contribs) 13:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I think this is a case where commercial links in the article serve as useful inline reference sources. There seemed to have been some spat between Airpollutioncontrol and Microcell about the use of commercial links in the article Regenerative thermal oxidizer, which by now has been resolved amongst the two. Anyway, Airpollutioncontrol seems to have been editing in Wikipedia for only one day (Nov. 25, 2009) and may not be back again. H Padleckas (talk) 10:32, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD discussion for Molecular processors

Possibly of interest to this project. See deletion discussion here. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 22:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment

I originally wanted to start a "bioengineering" Wiki. What steps would be needed to establish such an entity?

Thank you.

Sincerely, Tim Maguire Rutgers, Department of Biomedical Engineering — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timjm (talk • contribs)


If you're looking to set up a wiki completely separate from wikipedia, the software wikipedia uses is called mediawiki and is very easy to get up and running on a web server. If you're looking to create a bioengineering project on wikipedia, you can check here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Science - this is a list of all the science-related projects on wikipedia, it may already exist. Charlesreid1 (talk) 04:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Difference between fractional distillation and simple distillation

Who knows the difference between "fractional distillation" and "simple distillation"? At the moment I think the two definitions on Wikipedia are the same. --Aushulz (talk) 13:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

When I mentioned simple distillation in Wikipedia, I meant a distillation in which any distillate undergoes only one cycle of boiling followed by condensation. Such a distillation should have one theoretical plate or equilibrium stage. Such a laboratory scale distillation would not use a fractionating column. In a fractional distillation, the distillation involves more than one boiling-condensation cycle. Such distillations use fractionating columns in which multiple boiling-condensation cycles occur. Fractionating columns may contain multiple trays, each of which could theoretically act as an equilibrium stage in which a boiling-condensation cycle occurs, although in practice each tray may have less than full efficiency and correspond to less one full boiling-condensation cycle. Fractionating columns can also be packed columns in which a certain height filled with packing corresponds to one theoretical plate, called HETP. Either simple or fractional distillations may be batch or continuous distillations. H Padleckas (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
So I think many contents of the page Distillation (such as "Industrial distillation") need to be moved on Fractional distillation. --Aushulz (talk) 02:22, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Distillation covers any kind of distillation, whether simple or fractional, batch or continuous, laboratory scale or industrial scale. I see no "need" to take anything about distillation out of here unless this article becomes too long. Fractional distillation can cover its own details. H Padleckas (talk) 18:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Anaerobic digestion

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. You are being notified as this project's banner is on the talk page. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Anaerobic digestion/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 06:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Napalm

  • I was hoping that some of you folks with the Chemical & Bioengineering project would be able to give a chemist's look at the napalm article. I recently did an overhaul that brought the article up to snuff, but my scientific knowledge isn't enough to really complete the article. I saw that Naptha managed to make it "within the scope" of this wikiproject: So I was hoping that Napalm would be able to receive similar attention. bwmcmaste (talk) 15:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Core biographies

The field of chemical engineering is so broad that I doubt we can readily limit the number without some very restrictive criteria. The List of chemical engineers already contains far more than 16 biographies, and several more have been proposed on its discussion page. I propose that we replace the table on the project page with links to separate lists for each of the four fields shown here.ChemE50 (talk) 22:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:COI: volunteers needed

There’s a good number of people, e.g. Kww (talk), Tim Vickers (talk), Coren (talk), among many others, who have expressed desire to have me permanently banned from Wikipedia for writing on the subject of the “human molecule”, efforts of which resulted in a one year ban on me, back in 2007. To exemplify one objection, as expressed by Coren earlier this year: “You seem to ignore, Mr Thims, that Wikipedia is not the proper venue to document your novel theories.” The central problem here is that this is not “my novel theory”; but rather the theory dates back over two hundred years, with over ninety different people publishing content on this subject:

There have been at least six books written on the subject, one painting, four aluminum Molecule Man statues (one 100-foot tall), movie mentions, articles, over a dozen videos, many debates, posters, as well as college courses (dating back to 1894) taught utilizing the human molecule perspective as a basis. What seems to be the case is that either: (a) I have been mis-labeled as an editor with aims of self-promotion over that of an editor with a genuine interest in a subject (that very few people write on or know about); or (b) the subject is an anathema to many editors (and as such are using the various bylaws of Wikipedia in their favor to block the subject from Wikipedia)? To give a bit of history of my failed efforts to write neutral overview article on the subject:

Article EoHT article Deletion #1 Deletion #2 Desired neutral article
Human molecule (human molecule) AFD (I requested deletion) redirect to nanoputian (10 Oct 2007) Delete per WP:CSD#G4 (11 Jun 2010)

What I am looking for, at this point, being that there obviously exists some form admitable of conflict of interest (being that I wrote a history book on the subject of the human molecule in 2008 and that I seem to be one of only three people, including Robert Sterner and James Elser (2000), who have every made an attempt at the calculation of the molecular formula for one person), is for a minimum of about two or three neutral volunteer editors to write up a one page article (or even stub paragraph) on the subject of the “human molecule” (encompassing its derivative terms human atom, social atom, human chemical, human element, etc.), and I will confide my contributions or guidance of the article to the talk page. The topic, to note, is very controversial being that it is at odds with many cherished theories, particularly those of religion as well as many secular theories, such as life, free will, choice, purpose, etc.

My interest in having a Wikipedia article on this subject is so that children, age 15 or younger, will know that there is an alternative viewpoint out there on what it means to be a “human” (in contrast to the dogma of outdated subjects such as religion or other secular philosophies), and that this subject has been tossed around for at least 200-years now. At a minimum I would like to see:

(a) the mention that French philosopher Jean Sales (friend of Voltaire) coined the term in 1789 as follows: "we conclude that there exists a principle of the human body which comes from the great process in which so many millions of atoms of the earth become many millions of human molecules."
(b) the Sterner-Elser 2002 published calculation for the empirical molecular formula for one “human molecule”, as found in their Ecological Stoichiometry textbook, where they define a human (a publication which has been cited over 750-times): [1]

It is my view that the ban of this topic from Wikipedia is equivalent to the hysteria that results in acts of book burning of olden days or the inquisitions of Galileo for believing in the work of Copernicus. As Physchim62 (talk) put in on 11 Jun 2010 "It seems like the witch hunt is still on, more than eighteen months after the original events". I would like to think that there are more than myself and Physchim62 amenable to having a short stub article on the subject of the human defined atomically. I will post this help-message on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics and Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry talk pages. Comments welcome. --Libb Thims (talk) 19:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

How is this to do with: Chemical and Bio Engineering project? פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 11:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Per suggestion by Kww at the 27 Aug 2010 deletion review, I have initiated an incubator space page: Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Human molecule. I will work on developing a cogent acceptable article over the next week or so. Feel free to contribute with objections or suggestions. Thanks. --Libb Thims (talk) 18:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Green diesel

There is a discussion to merge Green diesel article with Vegetable oil refining and/or Biomass to liquid articles. Beagel (talk) 09:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Technical assistance needed at DYK

At T:TDYK#Forged composite, there is debate in need of technical expertise.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:24, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Countercurrent exchange

I changed the entry extensively. Could someone please review?
Please change the status from 'Start'...
Also please see my remarks on the page's talk page: I have two questions and a request for image help (because I don't have the time to do it myself). Thanks פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 10:58, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

List of important publications in chemistry at AfD

List of important publications in chemistry has been nominated for deletion. Discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in chemistry.  --Lambiam 22:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Consequence Analysis and Quantitative Risk Analysis (part of Process Safety)

I am interested in contributing to pages on Consequence analysis and QRA. Has anyone else done work in these fields? And is there an argument for creating a page about each subject? Princeofgonville (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Move request

Please comment on a move request at Talk:Boiler (heat)#Requested move. Thanks, D O N D E groovily Talk to me 14:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

New template: Template:Chemical engineering

User:Sunilshamnur has created a new template: Template:Chemical engineering in an Infobox style. I am thinking of revising it to a Navbox style according to this discussion: Template talk:Chemical engineering. It might take time for that to happen. H Padleckas (talk) 12:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

hello friends,i have created a new navbox template Template:Chemical engg so that we can have navbox at bottom.so please do not revise or modify infobox Template:Chemical engineering as it makes navigation more easy and increases aesthetic appeal of the page.thank you. SunilShamnur (talk) 2:19,12 December 2010 (UTC)
Note: User:Sunilshamnur has rather recently been blocked indefinitely for being a suspected sockpuppet of User:Sunilgaral, who was blocked indefinitely last year in Sept. 2010. H Padleckas (talk) 04:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
This template nearly duplicates another, {{Chemical engg}}, and putting both on the same page makes for some ugly articles (see, for example, Unit operation). One of them ought to be deleted. My feeling is that the subject is too broad for a navbox and {{Chemical engg}} is less intrusive. RockMagnetist (talk) 21:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated Template:Chemical engineering for speedy deletion because it is a substantial duplication of Template:Chemical engg. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Template:Chemical engineering is now under proposed regular deletion instead. H Padleckas (talk) 06:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I have overhauled Template:Chemical engineering to address some of the problems cited and to generally list better articles. Someday, I plan to expand Template:Chemical eng making it substantially different from Template:Chemical engineering. All of the core articles under "Chemical engineering" in this WikiProject, except Oil refinery and Material Science, have been included in the newly revised Template:Chemical engineering, and a number of substandard articles were removed. H Padleckas (talk) 06:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Separation process

Even though the Separation process article is listed as "Start" in its WikiProject banners on its Talk page, a lot of work still needs to be done. It's one of the 16 core articles under "Chemical engineering" in this WikiProject with an Importance rating on "High" on its banner, as well it should be - I think. There are three headers in this article that are still empty sections. I think it would be alright to re-organize these headers, but the article does need more expanding. I just put Template:Chemical engineering on it. H Padleckas (talk) 01:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Infobox Engineer

{{Infobox Engineer}} has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:37, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Coal gasification

Coal gasification article needs some help for cleanup/expansion. There is also an issue if this article should include different project description or not. Beagel (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Sustainability, sustainable development, and engineering emerging technologies

Due to a potential appearance of conflict of interest concerns[2] I have started a Request for Comments on engineering sustainable development. Tim AFS (talk) 06:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

International Year of Crystallography 2014

UNESCO proclaimed the "International Year of Crystallography 2014". It can be an important opportunity for wikipedians to contribute in an international initiative, spreading the scientific knowledge, in particular about crystallography.
These are my proposals to participate to this event:

  • to create the page International Year of Crystallography 2014 in all the Wikipedias
  • to improve substantially during this year the page Crystallography, Crystal and other important pages about crystallography, in all the Wikipedias
  • to create and translate pages related to crystallography
  • to create a Portal:Crystallography
  • to organize better the pictures in commons:Category:Crystallography and encourage the creation of new pictures
  • to contact all the Wikipedias, other Wikimedia projects, Wikimedia Foundation and the organizing committee of the "International Year of Crystallography 2014" (here you can see their contacts) to communicate our adhesion to this initiative.

Do you have any other opinion or suggestion? --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 10:14, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Mixing

Right now I've been working on Mixing (process engineering), and have tried to recruit some people to help me. It still needs a lot of work, including citations, but I think it deserves the attention of the people in this project. Also, please comment on the merger I've proposed with industrial mixer. After all, every process besides separation involves mixing. It's a shame that there are a bunch of small, fragmented articles on the subject rather than a few rich, detailed articles that will really help people.RSido (talk) 03:25, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Royal Society journals - subscription offer for one year

I'm delighted to say that the Royal Society, the UK’s National Academy for science, is offering 24 Wikipedians free access for one year to its prestigious range of scientific journals. Please note that much of the content of these journals is already freely available online, the details varying slightly between the journals – see the Royal Society Publishing webpages. For the purposes of this offer the Royal Society's journals are divided into 3 groups: Biological sciences, Physical sciences and history of science. For full details and signing-up, please see the applications page. Initial applications will close on 25 May 2014, but later applications will go on the waiting list. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 03:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Project restyling

I propose to restyle the project page. This is my proposal: User:Daniele Pugliesi/WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering.
The most important improvements are:

  • a banner at the top of the page
  • informations organized in boxes (we can use subpages and add a "link" parameter to make easy the edit of the content of each box, as I did for "Top core articles" and "Top core biographies" boxes)
  • added "class" and "importance" in "Top core articles" and "Top core biographies" list
  • "New articles" and "Pages needed".

--Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 00:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention

This is a notice about Category:Chemical and Bio Engineering articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 16:53, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Shelby Gem Factory, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Membrane listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Membrane to be moved to Membrane (selective barrier). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:29, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

BioRxiv support in citations

Main page: Help_talk:Citation_Style_1 § BioRxiv_support

This project's feedback would be appreciated in this discussion, as this could greatly (and positively) affect biological citations! Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Old merge proposal

Hello all! The proposal to merge Climbing and Falling Film Plate Evaporator with Falling film evaporator has languished without comment for over 3 years. I think at this point it's fair to close the merge proposal as uncontroversial. Unfortunately I have no idea what these articles are talking about. Any chance someone here could take a look and complete the merge (if appropriate) or remove the tags (if the articles are indeed describing distinct things). Thanks a bunch! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 04:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

I consider these two evaporators sufficiently different to warrant separate articles for better understanding of the differing mechanisms used to maintain the advantages of film evaporation. I suggest the lack of response may also be interpreted of a lack of support for merging; and I will remove the merger tags. Thewellman (talk) 19:31, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Great! Thanks for clearing that up! Ajpolino (talk) 20:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiJournal of Science promotion

The WikiJournal of Science is a start-up academic journal which aims to provide a new mechanism for ensuring the accuracy of Wikipedia's scientific content. It is part of a WikiJournal User Group that includes the flagship WikiJournal of Medicine.[2][3]. Like Wiki.J.Med, it intends to bridge the academia-Wikipedia gap by encouraging contributions by non-Wikipedians, and by putting content through peer review before integrating it into Wikipedia.

Since it is just starting out, it is looking for contributors in two main areas:

Editors

  • See submissions through external academic peer review
  • Format accepted articles
  • Promote the journal

Authors

  • Original articles on topics that don't yet have a Wikipedia page, or only a stub/start
  • Wikipedia articles that you are willing to see through external peer review (either solo or as in a group, process analagous to GA / FA review)
  • Image articles, based around an important medical image or summary diagram

If you're interested, please come and discuss the project on the journal's talk page, or the general discussion page for the WikiJournal User group.

  1. ^ Sterner, Robert W. and Elser, James J. (2002). Ecological Stoichiometry: the Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere (human molecule, pgs. 3, 47, 135). Princeton University Press.
  2. ^ Shafee, T; Das, D; Masukume, G; Häggström, M (2017). "WikiJournal of Medicine, the first Wikipedia-integrated academic journal". WikiJournal of Medicine. 4. doi:10.15347/wjm/2017.001.
  3. ^ "Wikiversity Journal: A new user group". The Signpost. 2016-06-15.

T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 10:38, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Iron bacteria

Editors with an interest in this subject are invited to comment on this discussion of recent and proposed changes to Wikipedia coverage and nomenclature. Thewellman (talk) 20:18, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Help with biotech investor article

Hi there, I'm looking for editors interested in biotechnology who might like to help improve the article for Randal J. Kirk, investor and CEO of Intrexon, a company that works to create biologically based products and projects that include the first FDA approved genetically altered food animal, genetically altered mosquitoes fighting viruses carried by the Aedes aegypti, non-browning apple, synthetic immuno-oncology, gasoline substitutes, crop protection, and improving bovine genetics. I'm looking to improve the article's readability and reduce WP:NPOV issues. You can see the full details of my edit request over at the Randal J. Kirk Talk page.

As disclosure, I do have a financial conflict of interest with this topic, as I am here as part of my work at Beutler Ink, consulting on behalf of Randal J. Kirk via Hill+Knowlton Strategies. As such, I do not intend to make any edits to the live article and hope other editors can review and make the changes they feel are appropriate. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 04:30, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi @16912 Rhiannon:! Thanks for the note and for disclosing that. I saw your proposed changes and I'll get a chance to take a look later this week or this weekend (anyone else should, of course, feel free to respond sooner if they're free!). Sorry for the radio silence you got on Talk:Randal_J._Kirk. So many articles; so little time... Cheers. Ajpolino (talk) 05:07, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

In honor of the efforts to the late Milton Beychok

I would like to ask, in the memory of this expert late editor's contributions, that some of his articles and sections be reviewed, and reliable chem eng sources be added when necessary. While I have no doubt as to current accuracy of areas where this AIChE Fellow worked and illustrated, unsourced content begets unsourced future edits, and the current quality is at risk if the sections invite inexpert future edits. So, I am asking chem engineers to add good, reliable, worthy sources to this expertise-rich quality material. One such section, Schematic flow diagram and description at the article, Delayed coker, from which other material from him can be found, via his maintained User page. Note, Beychok authored a couple of books, and never cited them, as far as I can tell. It would be perfectly fitting (and academically appropriate), where his published work overlaps with his earlier compositions, to use these citations to support the texts. I will try to add, via bullets, other articles to look at to which he contributed, and any of his work that I can identify. Cheers, User:Leprof_7272. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Stephen Jacobsen (biologist) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Stephen Jacobsen (biologist) to be moved to Stephen Jacobsen. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 16:17, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Stephen Jacobsen (bioengineer) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Stephen Jacobsen (bioengineer) to be moved to Stephen Jacobsen. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Scientific images from WSC2017

Please take a look in here about newly uploaded scientific images on commons during Wiki Science Competitions 2017.--Alexmar983 (talk) 12:12, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Powder (substance) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Powder (substance) to be moved to Powder. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:16, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Distilled beverage listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Distilled beverage to be moved to Distilled liquor. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 07:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

edit-a-thon at Uni Fribourg about biomimicry

Hi, I'd like to inform you next Tuesday and Wedenesday in Switzerland @Flor WMCH, Alexmar983, and Totodu74: are organizing an edit-a-thon about bioinspired materials in the framework of the Plamatsu project.

In this page we will list all the newbies and enlarged/created articles. If you want to take a look in the student's sandboxes you are welcome (please ping us or write in the talk page if you can).--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Asian Paints Ltd listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Asian Paints Ltd to be moved to Asian Paints. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Candida blankii

Our favorite yeast? Probably not. But no pretense of compliance with WP:Before. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Storage water heater listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Storage water heater to be moved to Water heater. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Where to Start

Hi everybody, I'm just getting started at Wikipedia and would like to know if anybody has an idea of where I could start contributing to this project? Also is there a way to see a list of all the pages that fall under the scope of this project? Thanks Chenomic (talk) 04:32, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

@Chenomic: Hi Chenomic, I am a Chemical Engineer, too, and have contributed in Italian Wikipedia for pages related to Chemical Engineering. In my opinion there are a lot of things to do for improving pages in this field. For example you can start checking if all the typologies of chemical equipment have a page and looking for good sources about chemical equipment (e.g. on Google Books) to improve the pages that have been yet created. We could also contribute together in some specific page (that means an important contribution in a single page instead of small contributions in a lot of pages): in this case, let me know for which page(s) you are interested. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 21:26, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Cultured meat listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Cultured meat to be moved. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Artificial pancreas listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Artificial pancreas to be moved to Automated insulin delivery systems. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 00:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Help with article about Harvard Bioengineer?

Can someone help me review a series of updates to the article about the Harvard bio-engineer David Edwards (engineer). I work for his company Sensory Cloud, which is developing a Covid hygiene prophylactic using aerosolized calcium fortified saline. Talk:David Edwards (engineer)#Request Edit Nov 5 2020 Thanks for your consideration. PC7956 (talk) 21:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemical_and_Bio_Engineering/Archive_1&oldid=1224406549"