User talk:Blanchardb

This is Blanchardb's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by .

CNEP vs polymer failure

Hello, I just realise that my contribution (CNEP vs polymer failure) will be deleted tomorrow (assay!) but I do not understand why and how to improve the text (if possible). I saw that you are from Quebec, "peut être parlez-vous français?". Pouvez-vous m'aider? A bientôt j'espère--Urcize (talk) 16:51, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, "essay" means that the text reflects a personal opinion, or that of a group, and is therefore unacceptable in an encyclopedia. The fact is that, since there is an article called "CNEP vs polymer failure" and no article called "CNEP" that is about that same research center, there is something wrong. When I read the very first sentence of the article, I see no mention of CNEP, and that is something to be fixed.

In an encyclopedia article, a reader must be able to identify the subject by reading only the first sentence. The rest is just elaboration. The title is "CNEP vs polymer failure". So the first sentence should state what is CNEP, what is polymer failure, and, since the term "vs" is present, what is the arena in which the match between the two will take place (if that last comment does not apply, then the term "vs" should not be used). -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 08:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for this clarification, I leave the article be cancelled tomorrow and I plan to submit a new version (with new title). I should be happy if you could read this second version first, before edition. --82.127.52.85 (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have performed a page move to National Centre for the Evaluation of Photoprotection. I will also remove the deletion tag, as I am convinced now that you're on to something. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:21, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's Just a Plant

Hey, just wanted to let you know that It's Just a Plant, an article you prodded a while ago, made the front page in WP:DYK :]. Show's what a little bit of expansion and references can do, eh? Regards, FingersOnRoids♫ 01:51, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, yeah. Mind you, I didn't contest the deprodding. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the headup

You've reminded me of the fact the histories are lost. Also now I realize that the source page might be protected. So I must pursue some other way - probably admin assistance possibly with the more immediate and/or formally expressed consensus on the talk page. All the best, Biblbroks 's talk 00:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Woah

Sorry, accidentally marked your article as patrolled. Sorry about that. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that was the whole idea :-) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:12, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That it would be marked as patrolled or that it wouldn't be? Master&Expert (Talk) 01:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That it would be. The problem is that an article was on the patrol backlog as a month-old unpatrolled article, but that article was nonexistent. I had to recreate it just so that I could mark it as patrolled and remove it from the backlog. But when time came for me to mark it as patrolled, you beat me to the punch. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:18, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blanchardb. You have new messages at RHaworth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Great Job!

Today, for the first time, I started reverting vandalism using Recent Changes and I noticed that almost always either you or ClueBot had already reverted it between the time I clicked on the link and when I pressed undo! I would like to congratulate you and ask if you have any tips on how to spot vandalism and revert it so quickly. Great Job! --Micromaster (talk) (contributions) 02:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spurious entry in NewPages report

We have another one - see this log report. (If it does not show Tony Issac, the problem has been fixed.) I have reported it at Bugzilla. Please leave it untouched: a) so that the Bugzilla people can look at it and b) to confirm that, along with all other new pages, it will disappear after 30 days - if so it is not worth fussing about. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only other log regarding that page is that it has been moved to userspace with redirect suppressed. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 11:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As suggested by the people at Bugzilla, I have just filed a separate bug report on this matter. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 12:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Single Use Foodservice Packaging Article

I really hope this is how I reply to you. If not, please forgive me (and please let me know what I should do to contact you). I am new to Wikipedia and am still learning.

I recently wrote an article on Single use foodservice packaging (March 23). It is slated to be deleted and editors are discussing it currently. Using the editor's comments as a guide, I've been working on the article, removing some sections, adding others and doing general tweaking to make it more acceptable. This morning I added sections on its history and materials used in the industry.

Is there anyway to tell if I am on the right track or will my changes be considered? Will my changes help save the article? I hate to put a lot of more effort into an article that's just going to be deleted. I have other subjects I am more interested in writing about.

Thank you for your time. I hope you don't mind me writing to you like this, but you posted to my "talk" section that I could contact you with questions and you were the first editor to recommend deletion (so I figured that made you a good place to start looking for ways to improve things). Hrundle (talk) 13:14, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]