User talk:Biem

Hi, I assume that you added this figure File:Radon_and_Cancer_by_Cohen.GIF and claimed that it is a work of the US government. There is no good reason to think that, so I removed the tag on the commons. In general, the US government is federal employees working on government time. There are not many federal employees, and the federal government doesn't not operate a university outside of the DOD (to the best of my knowledge) nor does it operate all private universities in the US, such as University of Pittsburgh. Even if it did, the employees could be contract workers and their work would not be subject to government ownership and non-copyright status. PDBailey (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

addressing me

Hi, there is no reason to link to my talk and page when you address me, you can just write, "PDBailey" or something like that. I say this because it is not typical and is a little jarring to read. While I am writing on you page, I want to thank you for being so civil in your conversation with me, I really appreciate that we are not in a revert war while conversing. PDBailey (talk) 19:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - that was just a copy-and-paste of your signature, sorry if it was felt offensive, that was not intended to be so. I do hope/think our discussion will clarify the subject and that the best way to present "it" (whatever "it" is :) in the article will emerge from that, there is no need to revert anything. Sincerely, Biem (talk) 16:28, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Ecological+studies

A tag has been placed on Ecological+studies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Pontificalibus (talk) 17:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Watras

Thanks for adding this to the Radon page! PDBailey (talk) 22:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beast

Biem, I was trying to say that the article was quite long and strayed off topic.

What I would really like is to create a dose response page that merges LNT and radiation hormesis as well as what you have done on radon. PDBailey (talk) 19:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds a good idea to me, WP:be bold ... Biem (talk) 20:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAR

Radon, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gerald F. Tape, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atomic Energy Commission (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Space Elevator

Hello,

I undid the 17 edits you made to Space elevator over the span of a few hours. Some of them may have been good, but most that I looked at were pretty major original research WP:OR. Yes, "be bold" is encouraged, but the reality is that if you blast an article like that with 1) multiple changes per edit, and 2) many many edits like that, and 3) 70% of the edits being serious OR, and 4) occasional "I know it all" edit comments in the mix, well you're asking for trouble. To expect other editors to be happy to review every one of the 50 or so edits for the actually-usable nuggets would be an unreasonable burden placed on others backs. So, what happens is that all the edits get reverted in one fell swoop in the name of expeditiously getting the article back to a state that's at least "okay" -- and that is right and proper. If you want to have a better chance of your enthusiastic work having the good effect you would like, try one or two changes at a time and leave it for a while for other editors to process it. Also, talk about some things on the talk page. That's really the only way to get big changes done successfully.

100.0.212.138 (talk) 10:00, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]