Talk:American Society of Civil Engineers

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Civil engineering High‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering 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.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCivil engineering
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 15 May 2018.

Recent updates to this article in November 2015

All of the non-working links are now active working links. And the portions that needed citations now have references.

Also, the addition of material regarding the ASCE's Katrina levee investigation makes the article much more balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldonville (talk • contribs) 22:16, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

POV ?

Most of this article reads like it was taken from the ASCE website promo materials. The "Mission" section repeats info from the ASCE website, and references the ASCE website.

The sole purpose of the ASCE and their vaunted and mendacious infrastructure report is to increase spending on public construction projects. In a world of declining natural resources, the need for highways and such will decrease, not increase. Not every bridge is a death trap... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.67.79 (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the huge amount of promotional language on this page. And added quotation marks in the mission statement section Johnathlon (talk) 23:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewritten the history section to incorporate secondary sources such as the Calhoun (1960) and Hunt (1897) materials ... as well as pulling other society data from their IRS form 990s... Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 18:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great article. Nothing overrepresented. Each fact was referenced with an appropriate source. MarquisJohnHall (talk) 23:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)MarquisJohnHall[reply]

Many thanks... Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 12:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seven Wonders of the Modern World

An anonymous user created a separate article containing the Seven Wonders of the Modern World. I just wanted to alert those that maintain this page. Technically that information should be removed from this page if the new article is retained. --Dan East 00:53, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Removed dubious wonders

The Kremlin and Red Square (Moscow, Russia)
Mamayev Kurgan (Volgograd, Russia)

These are especially dubious and I don't see how a city square is an engineering marvel or even the statue. Ufwuct 00:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All of the links that were non-working are now fixed.

Further, the addition of much material, properly cited, regarding the Katrina levee investigation makes this article much more balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldonville (talk • contribs) 22:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Society of Civil Engineers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100802000000/http://www.asce.org/Content.aspx?id=2147487305 to http://www.asce.org/Content.aspx?id=2147487305

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit article to follow along the lines of the IEEE and ASME articles ...

The IEEE article is rated by WikiProject Engineering as B-class, Top-importance ... while ASCE is rated equally important, it's is only rated Start-Class ... I would propose to start editing the ASCE article along the lines of the IEEE article as a template but obviously with the ASCE content ... For full disclosure purposes, as a civil engineer, I am a member of the organization, but this is strictly a volunteer activity and I was not requested by ASCE to do this work. Nor, am I receiving any compensation for this work. Risk Engineer (talk) 16:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In some cases, such as the controversy materials .. I went with the ASME practice of putting that material at the end of the article .. One downside of both the IEEE and ASME articles is the lack of a program overview section ...See the National Academy of Engineering as an example of the program approach. I propose reorganizing the ASCE program elements such as Publications, Education and engineering programs, etc. to go under a single overview article like NAE's. The source for this material in the current ASCE article as well as my edits from the public domain documents, the IRS form 990s which are public domain. Cheers ... Risk Engineer (talk) 18:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed maintenance tags ... Actual, potential and apparent COI Declaration and Information

Previously the article had been tagged in 2011 and again in 2016 with "Multiple issues - "refimprove"|date=December 2011 ... "advert"|date=March 2016 ... I have worked to rewrite eight of the ten sections to remove promotional material as well as provide additional citations for statements. As noted elsewhere in this page, I am a member of the organization but did these edits on a volunteer basis without compensation. ASCE did not direct or otherwise guide these edits. I have made these edits strictly adhering to Wikipedia requirements that the entry on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) be neutral, free of marketing and advertorial content, and properly cited for verification of all information added to the entry. I welcome any input, edits, and feedback from the Wikipedia community in regards to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) page. As I have frequently stated when providing disclosure: if you have any questions about my editing activities, please leave me a message on my User Talk page. I am proud of the work I do and intend that my contributions always make Wikipedia better. Cheers .... Risk Engineer (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Split off the "Controversies in New Orleans levee investigations"?

I'm reading the section on here and I think it would be better as its own article. If not, it seems it could fit in a related Katrina article about it. – The Grid (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]