Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Measurement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Measurement (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Measurement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Measurement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
Shortcut:
Article alerts
Articles for deletion
Proposed deletions

Article alerts[edit]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:23, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

I need your help[edit]

Hi metrologists, I ask for your help. I am stalked by two Chemists that unfortunately have no clue about metrology. I try to make sure that articles are written in correct metrological terminology. Now they are planing to ban me again (see here User_talk:Kkmurray/1). I hope you guys can see that his article Kendrick mass is full of incorrect language (even though it is all taken from reviewed papers) and that my article Kendrick (unit) is better.

Here you find the whole story of the current argument: Talk:Kendrick_mass.

We had an argument before on which they achieved to have me banned for one year. I still think this ban was incorrect. The argument was about a physical quantity in mass spectrometry, the mass-to-charge ratio. Some in the chemistry branch of mass spectrometry use a "dimensionless" m/z and my claim is that a mass-to-charge ratio by definition cannot be dimensionless and therefore needs a unit and that a symbol m/Q would be more appropriate. I partly won the argument because my article Thomson (unit) is still alive.

The deeper issue on this new argument is that many chemists seem not able to make the difference between a quantity Q = n * unit, and the numerical factor n of a quantity. Please check yourself and I would really appreciate your support here Talk:Kendrick_mass. Kehrli (talk) 31 October 2010

Merger proposal discussion[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Comparison of the imperial and US customary measurement systems#Merger proposal. 212.183.140.15 (talk) 22:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

(Old) template:dimanalysis[edit]

I don't watch this project, much so apologies if the issue has been raised before. I created this back in September 2012 and modified it this morning, in the hope of simplifying typing dimensions of physical quantities quicker without having to type out square brackets, boldface, superscripts every time. A drawback remains, for negative powers we still have to search out the minus sign in the edit panel, or character map on the computer, or use HTML code etc. but it can't be helped. It has been boldly added to the project main page.

Not sure if it's going to be used much. If the editors think it may be useful by all means use and tweak as you may. It has been implemented in electronvolt. If not, the presumable reason for deletion would be redundancy... M∧Ŝc2ħεИτlk 06:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation of minute[edit]

In the Minute article, I'm not sure whether to tag various sections as a proposed merge and/or a proposed split, or just try and fix it. I would be glad of suggestions as to where to hold any discussion, or perhaps someone with a better knowledge of astronomy could have a look. The article on Minute now seems to have acquired information on the unit of angular measurement (degree, minute, second), though this is actually dealt with at Minute of arc, as explained at Minute (disambiguation). The article should be about a particular concept, not about a word used to refer to different concepts; so I think the disambiguation hatnote should be improved (e.g. {{About|the unit of time (hour, minute, second) |the unit of angular measurement (degree, minute, second) |Minute of arc|other uses}}) and the information on the arc minute (angle) removed (null merge into Arc of minute).

This is complicated by the fact that the Minute article currently also contains information on the separate (astronomical) unit of right ascension, usually measured in hours, minutes and seconds - not the astronomical use of degrees, minutes, and seconds described at Minute of arc. This is not as far removed as the angular measurement in degrees and minutes but I would still say it is a separate concept, so I would suggest merging any sourced information into the article Right ascension and also linking to that article in the disambiguation hatnote. There is also a reference to old astronomical texts using the word minute in the meaning of 1/60th of a day (24 "usual minutes"). I'm not sure where that belongs, presumably in an astronomical article, but the dismbiguation hatnote should also refer there (directly or indirectly). In general, the Minute article looks as if it need some TLC. --Boson (talk) 12:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

"Hundred (word)"[edit]

Hundred (word) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has been proposed to be merged into 100 (number) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), see talk:100 (number) for the discussion -- 65.94.78.70 (talk) 05:00, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Human height in the metric system[edit]

Just seeking a wider range of input from informed persons at Template_talk:Height#rfc_97AACED.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 12:11, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

And again at Template_talk:Infobox_NFL_player#Human_height_and_the_metric_system.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Revised Certified reference materials page listed for review[edit]

Just a note to draw attention to the significant revision and consequent need for review of certified reference materials. SLR Ellison (talk) 23:44, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Wrong category name?[edit]

Please express your opinion here. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 02:24, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

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)