From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hydrogen pipeline transport[edit]

Not sure how to use this "Talk" feature, because I'm not a veteran wikipedian, but I just wanted to point out that your 3rd reference in this article (and in "Pipline transport" article), links to an external source article that does nothing to verify the claim of "50 to 100 miles". Where is the mention of this data? Was it mis-linked? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

RE:1809 in France[edit]

Okay. It just looked like there was enough content on that article to remain separate. Teh Rote (talk) 15:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Opposed to merging all Years by Country into Year[edit]

Hi BozMo - no objection to making each year consistent (as per 1850), but do not see why Years by County have to be merged into the year (eg 1809 in France) and the many hundreds of other years by country articles. A lot of us have spent substantial time ensuring we have Years by country articles (eg Ireland is very comprehensive) and these articles form a vital part of History by country.

Support 1850 format, but not merging of Years by country articles which stand very much in their own right. Ardfern (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


Have had to restore 1809 in France as it had been merged befiore any discussion completed. If this goes on many hundreds of articles will be lost that are part of History by country. Ardfern (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Mion - You cannot pull down people's articles without any discussion - this is not what Wikipedia is about. This article is part of a series and should not be destroyed. Ardfern (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you ![edit]

Dear Mion, I thank you very much for your informative help. --Asiri wiki (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Chubb Nabar[edit]

The pictures aren't in their restricted px marks. The pics are meant to be 65px but they are't. LB22's came out worse. Chubbennaitor 10:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Fine. ComputerGuy and LB22's Navbars are both destroyed to. If u want u can help them. Chubbennaitor 10:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

May you explain what you mean. I don't understand a word you said. It's running off mine to. Chubbennaitor 10:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I might, if you remove User:Chubbennaitor/Main Menu from your talksign. Mion (talk) 10:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Why? What do u mean by this-"why is TD with set ? and on 0px ? dont set TD with."Chubbennaitor 10:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that for some reason the 'px' sign has gone haywire because any free standing images are their uploaded size and not what the size is put as. Chubbennaitor 10:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Wrong, pictures can be displayed in size, regardless of there upload size, Mion (talk) 10:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Could you explain to me why they aren't going y the 'px's I set aren't effectig it. Chubbennaitor 12:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Did you remove User:Chubbennaitor/Main Menu from your talksign ? Its confusing to other editors. Mion (talk) 12:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

My map template problem (fuller description)[edit]

Thank you for looking at the "help me" note on my Talk page - but the problem is not solved. Please have a look at User:Martha_Forsyth/Mom's_Code-samples#Locating_places_on_a_map for an illustration of my problem. The positioning does not work correction when I use template:location map, but apparently when using template:infobox settlement, it does. (I discovered this when I wanted to put TWO town markers on the same map.) In addition, if you actually go to Template:Location_map_Bulgaria, you will see that (in contrast to, say, Template:Location map Republic of Macedonia, where you actually SEE the map and some coordinates. This suggests to me that something really is fouled up about the Bulgarian location template, and I would like to have it fixed (or learn how to fix it myself)! - Martha (talk) 02:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: I need help again[edit]

Oh, hello again Mion! The reason i ask is because at one point i had a link on my user page that was to a site that has personal information about myself. I'd like to delete my user page history so no nutters can ever find me. I am a anti-vandal, and people might hold a grudge against me for reverting their edits. I'm moving this discussion here for the same reason. I know of another user having his user page history deleted, probably for the same reasons. Thanks TheProf | Talk 12:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I've now e-mailed a request for my user page history deletion. Again, thank you for all your kind help !

-- TheProf | Talk 16:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Added some stuff and worked with another admin to add content. I also figured out the definition of a source for wikipedia, but thanks to an overzealous former PR manager, the only stuff online is copy. So I'm still looking for good Wikipedia style sourcing.Stuartfost (talk) 00:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer to help me[edit]

I have removed all the fair use images from the Portal:R&B and Soul Music and placed requests on the article talk pages for copyright free images when they are available. SriMesh | talk 01:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

BCC Research[edit]

Hoping you could peruse my updated site and offer criticism. Thanks Stuartfost (talk) 17:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The information you requested...[edit]

is on my talk page (another helper asked for it too). Low Sea (talk) 03:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Mion, I did as you suggested and offered a "good faith" effort to discuss my contribution. Unfortunately I feel the response was both erroneous and -- more of issue -- insulting. I have pretty thick skin but calling me "lazy" is one of the few things that can get my blood boiling and this user just crossed the civility line crystal clear.
As I look through this user's work I find a disturbing pattern of rudeness and intollerance for "less than perfection" on the topic of citations. In my opinion this behaviour may "scare off" less experienced / less "tough" users. I feel there is an civility issue with this user beyond my own interactions with him/her.
Still, I am trying to be civil and would like your's/somebody's suggestion on what would be the next best step to take with this user? I ask because I think I would really like to continue to use my skills and resources to help find relevant scholarly references for other articles in need of RSs (searching data is a forte of mine). I fear any efforts to do so will meet with the same arguments.
So I return to my original helpme question: Is what I did with the Unity Church article -- adding an RS cite and ask SMEs/primary editors if it is useful -- an acceptable form of contribution / adding value at Wikipedia? Are you the one I should ask or should I ask in some particular forum (ie: would you prefer the answer was some sort of concensus)? Thank you again. Low Sea (talk) 06:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment on my talk page, but no I cannot get onto the sockpuppet reporting page as my user name is new (I only got a static IP yesterday). Will re-open helpme for the moment Alchemy12 (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Simon Bruce[edit]

Hey, thanks for the help on the Simon Bruce page. I dont know why I am having so much trouble getting it reinstated. I dont understand the conflict of interest either. Check my ip if you can. I am a 43 year old Mother in San Francisco. My son heard of this kid Simon Bruce in Nashville and there is a huge buzz around him getting signed. I know a bit about wiki and wanted to make him a page. Thats all. I have contacted all the copywrite owners of his webpage etc to get authorization to use it on wiki. I have had a wiki account (caponofrio) for over 2 years.

I made this new account so that my son's friend could monitor it, and at the same time teach them how to use wiki. Please help me get the Simon Bruce page reinstated. Thanks for helping to clean it up too. --Sarahmckem (talk) 16:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Ballard Power Systems
Interstate 75
Bergius process
Tom Magliozzi
Biochemical sensor
MHD sensor
Complex hydride
HOPE Curriculum
Ray Magliozzi
Battery charger
California Fuel Cell Partnership
Noble metal
Net energy gain
Steam reforming
Motion detector
Add Sources
Liquid hydrogen
Addison Bain
Series and parallel circuits
Johnson's Criteria
Ecosystem services
Paste up
HVC 127-41-330

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Noble metal
Pascale Machaalani
Ballard Power Systems
Strain gauge
MHD sensor
Biochemical sensor
Participation (decision making)
National Center for Hydrogen Technology
HOPE Curriculum
New Democracy (Sweden)
Magnesium fluoride
Ray Magliozzi
Lithium triborate
Adenotrophic viviparity
Tom Magliozzi
Xenon arc lamp
Plasma lamp
Steam reforming
Motion detector
Add Sources
Liquid hydrogen
Addison Bain
Fresnel equations
Metal Storm
Paste up
George Stephanopoulos

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Zero Emission Resource Organisation[edit]

On my talk page. EnviroboyTalkCs 23:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


Hi Mion,

I have removed the Transparency backlinks because they are in violation of Wikipedia:Hatnotes#Disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. If you have a reason for an exception to this guideline, please provide it on the Transparency talk page. If you disagree with the guideline itself, please start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Hatnote.

Neelix (talk) 22:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


FYI, NASA is an agency of the federal government and as such, its works are in the public domain. See {{NASA}}, which is added to articles that are copied from NASA sites. Regards, howcheng {chat} 17:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

No, thats not true, see Work_of_the_United_States_Government, NASA copyright is regulated by the Federal Acquisition Regulations and not automatic in the public domain, even worse the disclaimer states as a requirement:
  • 4. NASA should be acknowledged as the source of the material. Which makes all material non free. Mion (talk) 19:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
    • "Should" != "Must" and even if it does, so what? Acknowledging the source of the material is a requirement of the GFDL as well. It doesn't mean that you can't alter it and use it for your own purposes. howcheng {chat} 20:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The template should look more like this one Template:Non-free EU website image Mion (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • 1. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material if it is for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. (from [1]

only for educational or informational purposes - NOT for commercial reproduction and that includes Internet Web Pages. So i stick with the non-free label. Mion (talk) 20:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't say "ONLY for educational"... and further down, #8 says specifically "NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted." How much clearer does it need to be? howcheng {chat} 21:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
You can't go cherry picking in a disclaimer for every piece taken from the website you have to add "NASA should be acknowledged as the source of the material" (or put the line on the template). Mion (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
WP:SOFIXIT. howcheng {chat} 23:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
haha, ok, but give me a few days, i have a lot of work to do. Mion (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


Mion - I actually work FOR Spinoff. The copyright is ours. We're trying to establish a Wikipedia presence. --AM at NASA: Contact Spinoff office with any questions. (talk) 17:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Marc A. Anderson[edit]

Thanks for your message. Even if the article started out as at autobiography, the big question is whether Marc A. Anderson is notable by Wikipedia standards. If not, the article should go. If he is notable, then we should fix the article so that the style and tone are the way we want. The decision on whether to keep an article has nothing to do with punishing the subject of the article for submitting an autobiography and everything to do with making the encyclopedia better. --Eastmain (talk) 14:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No, see Wikipedia:ADVERT#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles, that article is only made for promotional purposes. Mion (talk) 16:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

re: Hydrogen economy[edit]

re: Hydrogen economy (edit talk links history) and

Hi FrankB, you are right to point that there is a problem in the intro of the article, i tried a fix Talk:Hydrogen_economy#Theoretical_or_hypothetical, as for tocright, personaly i think the loss of a clear overview/readability is bigger than the gain on whitespace, well thats personal. Cheers Mion (talk) 08:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

  • One mans taste is another mans poison, I guess. I prefer less paging down to keep reading. Shrug. See the talk. And cheers yourself, but take a reality break. // FrankB 09:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

grid energy storage[edit]

Your point is correct about the Nocera development being research. The article currently makes the statement "However, substantial energy losses are involved in the hydrogen storage cycle of production, liquification or compression, and conversion back to electricity". Would you have an issue with a statement staying that, regarding this statement that there is promising research at places such as MIT etc etc and make the link to the Nocera article? If you want to propose and insert the sentence, it's fine by me. The intent here is increase the information flow between problems and current research. If you are wary of the overhyping that accompanies recent work, I am with you- so if you are concerned about it, please do the sentence. Otherwise I will in a few days. Regards. Mak (talk) 17:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

From your response, my guess is that you are aware of large scale schemes that require significant grid storage such as SCi-American's "Solar Grand Plan" article in Jan 2008. In that particular proposal, the storage was similar to one implemented in the UK- compressed air in caverns, which feeds an LNG turbine when the electricity is recovered. The overall thermodynamic efficiency was not great, but it was better than nothing. Are you aware of any large scale grid storage studies using hydrogen? It seems to me the big problem is the low effciency of the fuel cells (only 50% in ideal conditions) with overall efficiency at 30%- lower if the hydrogen must be liquified. Mak (talk) 22:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


User:SteveBaker feels my most recent edits to Hydrogen fuel enhancement are in WP:COI. I maintain that the edits are NPOV. Your opinion is appreciated on the articles talk page. Noah Seidman (talk) 04:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Locomotive Merge[edit]

I think you are mistaken, if you are refering to this then they were talking about splitting the different types of locomotives: I am beginning to wonder if we should split out the different types of locomotive into seperate Steam Locomotive, Diesel Locomotive, etc. pages. --Morven 11:06, 20 Sep 2003 (UTC)

That might be a good idea if we left a paragraph or so, of information about the locomotive types on the locomotive page, but had links to their own articles which went into much more detail, but it would only be worth while if the split off articles had a lot more information. G-Man 11:10, 20 Sep 2003 (UTC)

sounds like a good idea. Like G-man says, leave an overview here and then specialise in further articles. -- Tarquin 12:00, 20 Sep 2003 (UTC) the current combined page creates deficiencies. i was looking for more in-depth information about Steam Locomotives. Zzorse 15:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Ok we can do it your way, but the suggested merge was locomotive and locomotive engineer, NOT locomotive engineer and railroad engineer. My Account (talk) 15:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    • I got the picture you don't have to give me a lecture about merging, Thanks! [[User:My

Account|My Account]] (talk) 16:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you an Administrator[edit]

I don't want to nominate you I was just wondering if you were?

No, i'm not an administrator. Mion (talk) 17:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Salinity gradient[edit]

Hi Mion, thank you very much for your timely intervention and comments! Sorry for my clumsy editing: I am truly a neophyte of wikipedia. As you correctly understood, I was trying to reorganize the page "Blue energy" because with this term it is commonly designated Ocean Energy in general. What the page described, instead, was a specific technology: Salinity gradient (or osmotic). So I created a page "Salinity Gradient" with a slightly different version of the original "Blue energy" page, and then redirected "Blue energy" to "Salinity gradient". Of course, I messed up! I understand I should have moved the content, instead of deleting it. All should be fine now with the exception of the redirection: now Blue energy redirects to Salinity gradient, but it should redirect to "Ocean Energy" instead. May I proceed? Thanks again for your help! Mrosaclot (talk) 12:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008[edit]


Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Blue energy, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Blue energy was moved to Salinity gradient by Mion (u) (t) redirecting article to non-existant page on 2008-08-18T16:39:07+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 16:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Seimens cycle[edit]

You're welcome. I hadn't heard of the Seimens cycle before I saw the article, but I know enough basic physics to want to understand it. Glad you thought I helped. TrulyBlue (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


I don't think you've quite understood what a precooled jet engine is if you're putting it in the rocket engine category ;-) Hint: it's *air* being precooled(!)

All of the proposed precooled jet engines are aeroengines and the attached vehicles are aircraft.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 01:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

(the fuel (e.g. H2) is burnt in the combustor,), but you're right, wrong cat, it goes back. thanks Mion (talk) 08:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


Kværner-process User A1 (talk) 09:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

just to name a few :)Mion (talk) 23:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

listed on Wikipedia:Translation, (Low hydrogen annealing, Hydrogen corrosion, Bacterial anaerobic corrosion, Buoyancy compensator (aviation), Recombinator, Staged reforming, Hydrogen-iron resistance, Iron-hydrogen resistor and Temperature-programmed reduction. Note

Buoyancy compensator[edit]

I notice you've gone to the trouble of creating a dab page to distinguish between Buoyancy compensator (diving) and Buoyancy compensator (aviation) even though the latter page does not exist. Reading WP:PRIMARYTOPIC would surely lead to the conclusion that the existing page is the primary topic? The purpose of dab pages is to aid someone who is searching for an article - it seems to me that the gain nothing from a link to an article that does not exist. In this case, I would suggest that it would be preferable to have Buoyancy compensator as the main article, then include a disambiguation link at the top when the (aviation) article is created - as suggested in WP:DAB. If you agree this is the best way to go, perhaps you'd be kind enough to revert your last set of changes while it is still an easy job to do? --RexxS (talk) 12:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The other page is in translation, see Wikipedia:Translation/Buoyancy compensator (aviation), primarytopic is questionable, it depends, if you live in the world of diving maybe, if you live in the world of aviation maybe the other page is the primarytopic, i fixed the direct links to Buoyancy compensator (diving), so people following links from the diving pages go directly to the right page, the dab page is more or less a guide page to find the right page. Cheers Mion (talk) 12:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC).
And following primary topic, diving is the first entry on Buoyancy compensator. :) Mion (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Ah - that's ok, no problem then. I would (naturally as a scuba diver) suggest that the diving topic is primary. That's because in diving, it's an essential piece of life-support kit that every diver uses, with a number of variations in type, so is probably a well-searched for topic. Whereas in aviation, I suspect that it's a minor item that gets shoved under the seat and forgotten about, :p. Nevertheless, I'm happy to defer to your judgement as the difference between dab-page and dab-link won't matter much. I hope to see the new article come out of translation soon. Best --RexxS (talk) 13:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


I've knocked up a translation at User:RexxS/Hydrox adding a few web links to replace the french "See also". Cast your eye over it and see if it's ok for you. --RexxS (talk) 18:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Awarded for your amazing ability to increase article quality and seek out assistance from contributors with translation skills as you did with the hydrox. --Gene Hobbs (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Ha thanks Gene Hobbs, but the actual work is in the translation itself. Mion (talk) 13:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


Good luck reforming Mac... he's been at this for a veeery long time, and he doesn't care what we say because he's on a mission from God. NJGW (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, i need it :) Mion (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Fuel Dispenser[edit]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. The page fuel dispenser is accurate and true, please stop reverting it. (talk) 22:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for Rollback[edit]

Hi. I've granted you the rollback tool though to be honest I'm suprised you haven't got some more in your armoury :) Pedro :  Chat  13:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Pedro, as for the armoury, i don't need more in the current situation. Cheers Mion (talk) 13:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. If you ever find you're being hindered from helping here by a lack of admin tools just ask. Happy editing. Pedro :  Chat  13:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I will, thnx . Mion (talk) 13:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of WTFPL[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, WTFPL, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WTFPL (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

Thanks for the star![edit]

It's nice of you to notice my work.

--Thorseth (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

List of oil refineries
Top Alcohol
Emission standard
Ton of oil equivalent
Sustainable industries
Angela's Ashes (film)
Ballard Power Systems
Biomass to liquid
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context
Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
Proton conductor
Styria (company)
X10 (industry standard)
Hydrostatic test
National Association of Railroad Passengers
Wave power
Sustainable agriculture
Steam reforming
Add Sources
Battery electric vehicle
Fuel pump
Flow measurement
Constructed wetland
Ecosystem services
List of waste management topics
Honda Civic Hybrid
Pelican case

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Vertical farming links[edit]

You reversed my linkedit in the Vertical Farming article... and added this: "Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Vertical farming." ... snip... "..advertising.."

Excuse me, but how is this possibly inappropriate? That page has links to various Vertical Farm designs, and articles. Which is exactly what I posted. I posted a link to a vertical farm design, and a link to an article going much deeper into the possibilities of vertical farming than the Wiki article does.

You also reversed the text which has a summary of vertical farm designs around the world. There are only a handful of these therefore a list is appropriate. I listed another vertical farm design that is missing from the list and... you seem to think this is also inappropriate? Please explain.

These articles and designs are original research. There are many links much more lower in infomation value on that page. Please explain why you feel this is inappropriate, for now, I'm putting the links back. These links are not provided to make the section of links complete. They are there because both the article and the design do substantially different things than the other posts. For one, the farms I linked to are tightly interwoven in a urban context, while none of the others are. Second, they're in shanghai in a dense, real, urban setting. Third, there's far more information available on these on the links I provided than there even exist on most other farms.

While I should not even need to explain this, as I don't see why the added sections are valid in the context of the page, I will have you know these designs and articles are not-for-profit research that has been made public.

See Special:Contributions/, we call that spamming. Mion (talk) 07:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I was about to add a series of encyclopedic entries and knowledge/research from the links I provided directly into the article, but witnessing how this community operates, I'm not sure I'd like to be a part of it, especially since apparently providing original research to the community is deemed... 'advertising'.

So maybe, the actions where in the wrong order, first the series of encyclopedic entries had been a good idea, but tagging them all with ? Mion (talk) 07:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

If you would actually investigate this, you'd see those are all different pages, with different contexts and different pieces of original research. Spamming is about blatantly advertising non relevant information. Thanks for the insult. I'm happy to provide expensive research to the world only in order to be called a spammer. is the host of the information, what else would you have me do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomBosschaert (talkcontribs) 07:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Look WP:COI doesn't prevent you from editing and making NPOV attributions, and you have to reference inline Wikipedia:Citing sources, so no problem, be careful about the original research, see WP:NOR, its better to use multiple sources for references, sorry for the bad start. Cheers Mion (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll continue contributing to these pages. Original research will be linked to. Unfortunately that would all have to be linked to from, if it's the only source of information. I appreciate the idea that Wikipedia is kept clean. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomBosschaert (talkcontribs) 09:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

If its the only source you can still put it up for discussion on the talkpage of the article or on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, they are used to sourcing, happy editing. Cheers Mion (talk) 09:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Pyramid Bioplastics[edit]

That's odd, I can't see where that wording was used. This is what you tagged and this is what I changed it to. There are only three edits to the page and there is no deleted versions. I also checked Pyramid bioplastics but that page has never existed and the deleted contributions for that user does not appear to have anything that looks like it might have contained that phrase. Although Google does have it. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that, unfortunally not until afterwards. When I first saw the thing I thought that they were making a redirect before someone else made a spammy article. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Power-to-weight ratio[edit]

Why all the "See also" section links to Power-to-weight ratio? Where it's relevant, wouldn't it be better to mention it and explain the relevance in the body of the article? (talk) 16:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

for batteries: As on Lead-acid battery "their ability to supply high surge currents means that the cells maintain a relatively large power-to-weight ratio." Sure its better to write it into the article, but preferable by someone with more interest in batteries than me, so i take the shortcut and add a link to See also. (directly related). Cheers Mion (talk) 16:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

A second thing beeing battery values are mentioned on Power-to-weight ratio, by adding the page to see also, i assume the values get more checked by people who have interest in the field. Mion (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Creating categories on Polish wikipedia[edit]

Hi there. The problem with your Kategoria:Zbiornikow cisnieniowych (+ diacritics) is that it is phrased in the wrong declension case. We use exclusively nominative, (the basic case, which answers the questions: what is it? Who is it?). That would be Kategoria:Zbiorniki cisnieniowe. Please transfer the goods to the correctly phrased category. Also, please indicate on your user page on the pl wiki, what languages we may use in order to get in touch with you, if Polish is not one of them. Thanks. It has also been suggested just now on #wikipedia-pl on IRC (Freenode server), that you really have no business creating categories in a language you have no fluency, which appears to be the case. Please leave that to speakers of Polish, in this case. As you see, it can be tricky. :) Best wishes, --Mareklug talk 12:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mareklug, Thanks for the help solving the issue, note taken. -:)Mion (talk) 13:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Glad to be of help. And, conveying one more observation from the Polish admins: the categories need not correspond 1-to-1 or even loosely across projects. Albeit, in my own opinion, it's useful, when they do. Best, --Mareklug talk 13:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I think i was confused by the pl frontpage - wolnej encyklopedii, którą każdy może edytować. -:) Mion (talk) 16:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Open source[edit]

Thanks for your message. Please feel free to add the link to wiktionary, if you think that a link to a glossary would be useful there. I don't think it is very useful to have such link (if something in the article needs clarification, a link to the corresponding wikipedia article is probably more helpful), but it won't hurt... Cheers. --Edcolins (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


Hi! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fafnir665 (talkcontribs) 00:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

"Promotional" material[edit]

Hello Mion, I would like to ask, what does it mean under "promotional material" in Wikipedia? I ask because of in contrast to IP2Location and MaxMind in Competitor Information Wipmania is completely free. What is in the last service the advertising, that is no advertising in the first two? Thank you in advance for your answer! Kind regards Alrond (talk) 23:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

thanks for your answer! I did't know about this, I'm sorry strange rules )) best regards, Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alrond (talkcontribs) 22:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Transparency (humanities)[edit]

See talk page: I suggest to move to politics instead of research, and to add a research paragraph there. Don't have the right to do the move, though. -- Mietchen (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I declined speedy deletion of the redirect. Please work out first how exactly you want to split those articles and to which names, maybe including a request for comments to get new input. Then use {{db-move}} to move an article over the redirect. Do not attempt to fix it yourself, rather let an admin sort it out once you have decided how exactly you want to name those articles. Regards SoWhy 11:19, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Cadmium telluride photovoltaics[edit]

I understand some of the very positive information regarding FirstSolar should be cut down and it will, but one cannot discuss the success of CdTe PV without also discussing FirstSolar. They have become one of the "giants" of solar (according to any industrial PV magazine/website) and their success is due to the use of CdTe. Any suggestions? SolarUSA (talk) 12:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Mion, as you are the most active editor of the Cad-telluride article I would like to discuss some of the edits. Would you please address the points I have brought up here and on the talk page?

Additionally, I think it is necessary to point out that I have NO connection to First Solar. It is a subject of discussion that is simply very germane to CdTe, as they have become one of the most dominant solar companies in the last 4 years from almost nothing. My intention in bringing them up was to highlight the viability of CdTe PV through the case study of First Solar.

Thank you for your input, SolarUSA (talk) 13:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a second look later, ask User:OttoTheFish as he did the most work on it. Cheers Mion (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for being so active. I want to produce a great article and it's clearly very important to have an experienced Wikipedian working on this. I see though that you moved Solar Tracking to a separate sub-heading, outside of "Issues." It seems rather minor and undeserving of such a space. Particularly as most installations of CdTe and other thin-films are non-tracking. SolarUSA (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sectionalism[edit]

Hi Mion, thanks for your comments and your time. I'm relatively new at this, so I appreciate any guidance I'm given. I was aware of the weasel and unreferenced tags, and usually I would stay away from outright deleting the article. But in this case I thought that there had been so many problems building off each other for so long that extricating the good from the bad would be unfeasible. I figured that the best thing to do in this case would be to delete the article and start over if necessary. However, your comments made me revisit the article and my judgment of it, and I noticed a couple of things in its history that I hadn't before. So if the article survives Afd, which it looks like it will, then I'll probably do some research on it and try to rewrite it to produce something encyclopedic. Anyway, once again, thanks for your input! Maethordaer (talk) 17:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome Mion (talk) 18:09, 25 October 2008 (UTC)