User talk:Cdang

Warning

If you want to reach me faster, please post on my french talk page (I read it more often than my english one). Posting in English is OK.

Bonjour Cdnc :) I hope you like the place and choose to stay.

Some links that may be of use:

Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers
Wikipedia:How to edit a page
Wikipedia:Village pump - ask questions you may have here, or leave a message on my talk page

It may be a good idea to instead of just creating an article with an interwiki link, to make a stub article instead. Not all english readers are bilingual! :)

Thanks and keep contributing :) Dysprosia 10:14, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

sure, I just make a fast scan of the pages I'm concerned. I found two existing pages that were empty, I just put the link, next time I will start wrtiting a small text for these pages if they are still empty. Cdnc 10:18, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Ok, that sounds good :) Dysprosia 10:21, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

the vacuum device

"Vacuum matress" really belongs at vacuum mattress (with two "t"'s). I'd be happy to move it if you don't know how or don't want to? - Nunh-huh 07:59, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

No problem, and it's not an English error, just a spelling one. They pop out at me. (also you may want to change "cervicall collar" to "cervical" in that article.) If it's any consolation, I can never get the accents in words like Hélène right... <g> - Nunh-huh 08:04, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm more than happy to modify articles, but sometimes when someone is relatively new (as I got the feeling you were) they can take that the wrong way. But I'm glad to see you are made of sterner stuff (and now recognize that you're not all that new<g>). - Nunh-huh 08:14, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, thanks. I'm not always so gentle, but I have a soft spot for Francophones, because they always spell "Restoration" as "Restauration" and that's just plain cute! - Nunh-huh 08:48, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I didn't realize we had a problem, but you are right. The article at "restauration" belongs as "restoration". "Restauration" is not a real word in English: that article seems to have started as a part of French history. See! I told you Francophones love that spelling<G>. Nunh-huh 09:09, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

With regard to Talk:evacuation, I would say that transport sanitaire could be translated Category:Medical transport but that Category:Patient transport may be the slightly more common term: either really would do, and you could probably put "lifting, moving, and transporting" all in the same category.

As for "scoop" (from Talk:Stretcher), it's a bit out of my field, but certainly there are "scoop stretchers" (the kind that you can slip under the patient without moving him - you can see examples and maybe get translation ideas at this catalog), but I think it is sort of slang for the process of "grab and put on the stretcher": for relevage I would simply say lifting. ("Lifting" for going from the ground to the stretcher, "moving" for moving the stretcher to the ambulance, "transporting" for getting to the hospital). But docs currently working in Emergency Rooms may be able to be of more help on this: you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clinical medicine. -- Nunh-huh 20:18, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From internal bleeding

You wrote "feeling of thickness, weakness, thirst (do not give anything to drink!);" Why not? Can the reason be added to the article as well? — Kieff | Talk 08:20, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the more info. I'll add that whenever I get the chance And btw, I'm not a native english speaker, I'm from Brazil :P — Kieff | Talk 15:28, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

Medic?

Hi Cdang, I've noticed some very good recent work on medical articles. I understand you're not a doctor (or are you?) Nevertheless, you're warmly invited to participate in Wikiproject "Clinical medicine".
From internal bleeding: (do not give anything to drink!) is a bit of a violation of Wikipedia style. I really recommend not writing in the second person; readers do not consult Wikipedia when they suspect internal bleeding; they call an ambulance. In old Wikipedia articles, the writers sometimes use this format, but it is not recommended... JFW | T@lk 19:36, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Not a medic? No worries. Your first-aid work is highly appreciated - you may have more experience in traumatology than me.... JFW | T@lk 07:53, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

but in France, most major trauma happen on the road, not in cultural events...
Here in the UK, it's pub brawls... JFW | T@lk 08:10, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Slipknot

Hello, did you happen to read my comment on Wikipedia:Bot requests regarding slipknot links? - RedWordSmith 01:12, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

SAMU

Nice improvements to SAMU, thanks ! :) Rama 18:31, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Images

Hi ! Following your suggestions on my talk page, I've done three other drawings; you cann see them on "First Aid Drawings" (three last ones). Comments welcome of course, is there is still something wrong, or if we need something else, don't hesitate to drop me a note ! Cheers ! Rama 07:44, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

moving pages

If you come across an article that is inappropriately titled, use the "move" button at the top of the page, instead of copy-and-pasting the content into the newly titled article. This automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new one. The article space at the old title then doesn't need to be deleted (I noticed you were marking articles for speedy deletion that you had moved, like First Fire Brigade, Marsaille(s) Marine Fire Brigade, etc). It's also a lot easier than manually copying the page. Lachatdelarue (talk) 15:45, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It's generally better to just leave the redirects in place, unless the title is totally unrelated (like in a vandalism/testing case), since someone was obviously mistaken as to what the group was called, so someone else might be too. As they say "redirects are cheap" :) Lachatdelarue (talk) 15:59, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Instructions Group

I am not sure why you blanked this article and then tagged it for speedy deletion. I agree that the article may not be sufficiently of interest for Wikipedia, and if it is worth keeping it should be renamed, but it is certainly not a speedy deletion candidate. You should not have blanked it (at least, not without giving a reason), but if you wish, you can nominate it for vfd.-gadfium 03:26, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikimania

Dis-moi, est-ce que tu penses aller à [Wikimania] ? Il y aurait une niche écologique pour des secouristes... Rama 10:03, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

binomial (disambiguation)

Hello. I don't think abbreviation of the word "disambiguation" is appropriate in the title of this article. The titles of Wikipedia disambiguation pages that include that word generally contain the whole word. So I've moved this one. Also, I think the appropriate way to link to this page is usually the sort of notice that I've just put at the top of the article titled binomial, not by adding it to a "see also" list at the bottom of the article. People looking for other meanings of the same word will seldom scroll all the way down to the bottom if the article is long. Michael Hardy 18:19, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't like either abbreviation, in the titles nor in the articles, but I think I saw it several times so I thought it was the rule.

It is the rule to write {{disambig}} in order to cause this notice to appear:

But then the reader of the article does not see the abbreviation. Michael Hardy 19:00, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Before deleting this discussion from my talk page as no longer current, I have one other comment. It seems English is not your native language, and one of the clearest signs of that is that you may fail to realize that

I don't like either abbreviation

and

I don't like abbreviation either

mean two different things. The first means "I don't like either one of those two abbreviations." The second means "I, too, dislike abbreviation." Michael Hardy 22:02, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I will not answer on your personal page because it seems you want to keep it "clean". If everyou come back here :

yes you're right, I'm a froggy. Thanks for the tip.

Cdang|write me 14:07, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Water analogy to electricity

I've started a rough draft for such an article here: User:Omegatron/water analogy Please edit it as you see fit, and I will move it to a real article. Is Water analogy to electric circuits a good title?

P.S. I like your diagrams! Do you upload them to the Commons? - Omegatron 13:45, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Wildfire and number conventions

Copied from User talk:Lommer

Hello,

thanks for correcting my English on Wildfire. I just have one remark: you replaced the non-breakable spaces by commas on the number, and this is in contradiction with the international standard, see [1]. I know this is not the habit in all countries, but I think respecting the international standards is a way to facilitate international exchanges and to respect the NPOV. It thus reverted to  .

Regards

Cdang|write me 08:58, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I did replace those spaces with commas, and I winced as I did it. I actually prefer the European system of decimals, etc, but the Wikipedia Manual of Style actually dictates that we use commas to separate groups of three and periods for decimal places. I agree that it's not really NPOV, but wikipedia does have to have some standard for number formats. I will revert the article back to the comma standard. -Lommer | ^talk 00:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Canules de Guedel

Salut ! Dis, je pensais, est-ce que tu vois comment on pourrait illustrer la procédure d'indertion des canules de Guedel ? ça pourrait être bien pour l'article Guedel Pattern Airway et fr:Canule_de_Guedel... A+ ! Rama 10:13, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2005_French_civil_unrest

Il y a eu pas mal de va-et-vient en ce qui concerne ton texte sur le contexte socio-historique; dire que ça alourdissait l'article se défend (c'est vrai qu'il est déjà long), mais je t'encouragerais assez à en faire un article à part -- quoique sa maintenance risque d'être difficile, vu ce à quoi on assiste déjà ici. Rama 08:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(enfin, comme tu le dis toi-meme sur la page de discussion, quoi ;) ) Rama 08:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency department

I wonder if you would consider supporting this article by voting for it at Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive to improve it towards feature article status. I hope to increase the profile of clinical medicine and related subjects on wikipeda. The current article is basic, in particular with regards to EDs around the world.--File Éireann 20:47, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pole figure

Hi Cdang, good to see that there are other materials scientists here on the wiki! :-)

I'm surprised by the development of pole figure; last time I watched the article, it was still very short! Do you know by accident how to describe an inverse pole figure? I would like to write an article about pole figures on the Dutch wikipedia, but I don't know exactly how to figure those inverse things out.

Bye, SietskeEN 13:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(After some visits to your work on the French wiki): I'll probably use your article fr:Indices_de_Miller in future, to base a Dutch article on. It looks very good. Did you use Cullity as the source, by the way? SietskeEN 13:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the hints, I think I understood. One article might be better indeed. :-) SietskeEN 21:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Cdang. You did a lot of early work on Pole figure, but recently the article has progressed very slowly. Is there much more to say about pole figures? I mean, how big of a topic is it? I ask because I'm considering merging it into the applications section of Stereographic projection. Joshua R. Davis (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dont know if you even remember asking

But you asked the difference between a CFR and EMT-B. CFR's are first aiders who are trained in more advanced techniques such as O2 admin, extractions with KED boards, spine management, advanced wound management etc but CANNOT administer any symptom relief drugs, or any drugs for that matter. The EMT-B is your basic paramedic, more advanced skills, can admin drugs. Mike _{(T C)} 05:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Dark Eye

I saw your edits on The Dark Eye article and that your edits created an inconsitency. Which of 11×11 and the earlier over two hundred is correct? I haven't played the game.

"A character also features over eighty skills, called "talents" (the use of a talent requires testing three attributes) and if the character is able to cast spells over two hundred spells (11×11)." - Jeltz talk 18:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On hospital ambulances

Hi - I'm looking at the section on Hospital Ambulances on the Ambulances page, which I think you did a lot of work on, so I'm looking for your input - is the H-MICU what is known in the United States as a fly-car? Do you think it would make sense to link H-MICU to the fly-car page, and expand the fly-car page to encompass the H-MICUs? Thanks - Badger151 02:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - thanks for the prompt reply. The H-MICU does look to be different. - Badger151 18:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article you created on GA

A page you created "Lone Wolf (gamebooks)" has became a Good Article, a very well-written article with appropriate images, referenced well and in other ways just good. Please take the barnstar to the left of this notice, cheers —M in un ^Spiderman 19:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cinema projection diagram

Greetings:

I have added a modification (for Engish and horizontal format) of your diagram to Movie_projector#Principles_of_operation.

Thanks, and best wishes, Leonard G. 21:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency action principles

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Emergency action principles, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Emergency action principles. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Joe 07:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject France

Hello! We are a group of editors working to improve the quality of France related articles. You look like someone who might be interested in joining us in the France WikiProject and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you in our project :-) STTW (talk) 15:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The project is new and we need members to carry out assesment of articles, who are better familiar with France and France related articles. Perhaps you could be of help, happy editing, STTW (talk) 21:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also you could share your experinece from the fr project and help us do things better. Cheers, STTW (talk) 06:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Organization of the emergency medical assistance

Hi. I was wondering if you had a problem with my renaming this "Organization of emergency medical assistance". The word "the" seems incorrect in English. Fanra 01:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

French Red Plan

Hi, I read your great description of the French Red Plan, and was wondering if you knew of any English language articles about it. I've been searching in vain for any articles discussing the plan in depth, offering criticism of the plan, or otherwise evaluating it. Are there maybe UK sources you know of? Please email me at "aducknamedjoe@gmail.com" if you can help me out. Thanks!

23:06, 18 July 2007 by 128.198.152.51 --Aducknamedjoe

Sorry for the late answer, I'm not often on the english Wikipedia (mainly on the french one).

Sorry also, unfortunately, I don't know any page in english.

cdang|write me 12:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way: the French Red Plan is now called "Orsec plan with numerous casualties" (Orsec stand for organisation des secours i.e. "rescue organisation"), you may find something with these words.

cdang|write me 09:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Success of fire suppression in northern forests

Please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Success of fire suppression in northern forests. Thanks. -- Jreferee t/c 06:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxation

hallo Cdang,

ich hoffe, dass ich es richtig verstanden habe, dass du ausreichend deutsch sprichst um meinen kommentar zu lesen.

auf der seite ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxation ) hast du dein bild von der luxierten schulter verwendet. nun wollte ich dich fragen ob du einverstanden wärst ein neues bild hiefür zu verwenden. ich persönlich gehöre zu der gruppe von leuten, die ihre schulter spontan luxoieren können. bei mir sieht man unter umständen (bei optimaler beleuchtung) die hierfür symptomatische "delle" in der haut, wenn das "klaviertastenphänomen" auftritt. dies könnte ich photografieren und dir das bild zur verfügung stellen.(keine angst ich hab dabei eher wenige bist fast keine schmerzen). des weiteren könnte man noch zu dem artikel weitere photos einfügen, auf denen man sieht wie ein frisch operiertes knie nach einem lateralen release aussieht. ich hatte schon 2 patellaluxationen und foglich genug möglichkeiten mein lädietes knie zu photographieren.

würde mich freuen, wenn du mir antwortest

mit freundlichen grüßen

Night-fever —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.200.70.23 (talk) 11:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo,

Entschuldigung spät zu sein, ich komme nicht oft auf en: (öfter au fr:). Ja, du kannst klar dein Bild selbst einfügen, nur sollst du ein Konto auf commons: öffnen, und dann download machen. Dann wird mann es benutzen können.

Grüsse

cdang|write me 11:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Free body diagram

Thank you for clarification. I was planning on revamping the image already, but was just too lazy to do so. As soon as I find time or get motivated enough, I'll fix it up. Thank you again! Cheers! -- penubag (talk) 05:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I come back to this rather old discussion. I agree with Bigbluefish. If we compute the net momentum at the center of mass, then we find that the object has a rotational acceleration due to

{\vec {F}}_{f}

. If we calculate it at the point of application of

{\vec {N}}

, then we find that the object has a rotational acceleration due to

{\vec {P}}

. Etc. This is not possible because the plane prevents the object from turning. This is far different from the bicycle where the link allows an inclination; a planar link between objects does not allow inclination. (Sorry if the technical vocabulary is not accurate, I'm not a native french speaker.) -cdang|write me 07:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your analysis is only true if the block is stationary. If the block is accelerating along the ramp in either direction, then the sum of moments about a point will not be zero. I do not understand what you are saying about a bicycle and a link. -AndrewDressel (talk) 21:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I partly agree, what I claim is only true if the frame of reference is inertial, and if the inclined plane is not rotating in this frame of reference; we talk about torque, so this is not a matter of acceleration but of angular acceleration: the m⋅a vector applies at G. Forget about the bicycle, it's not so important. Anyway, nothing in the picture or in the caption tells that the ramp could be rotating, or that the frame of reference is not inertial; thus, your picture is misleading, as most people would consider this. -cdang|write me 08:16, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have not assumed an accelerating reference frame or that the ramp is rotating. I have also not assumed that the block is stationary. I should have stated above "If the block is accelerating along the ramp in either direction, then the sum of moments about a point other than the center of mass will not be zero. No rotation, only non-zero acceleration, is necessary for angular momentum of the center of mass about some point that is not the center of mass to be non-zero. Again, I refer you to page 95 of this textbook. I have chosen the simplest of the three options for modeling the unknown distribution of contact forces between a block and a ramp, when the acceleration of the block remains, as yet, unknown. -AndrewDressel (talk) 13:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sum of the moments of the forces about any point is always the same: if you change the point, you change the moment arms, but you do not change the sum.
In point particle mechanics, the Newton's second law of motion states ∑F = ma. In rigid bodies mechanics, you add ∑M_A(F) = Iα, where A is any point, center of mass or not, the result is always the same.
The sum of the moments of the forces about any point is not zero on your picture, therefore an angular acceleration α.
The p. 95 of the textbook mentions the existence of a couple; there is no couple drawn on your figure. What we, BigBlueFish and I, suggest, is that you represent the "Equivalent force with no couple" (to refer to the textbook). Or that you represent the couple (turning arrow) that set α to 0. -cdang|write me 15:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sum of the moments of the forces about any point is always the rate of change of the angular momentum about that point. For a body translating without rotation, the rate of change of angular momentum about the center of mass is zero, and the rate of change of angular momentum about any other point is only zero if there is no acceleration. Thus the sum of the moments about the center of mass will differ from the sum of the moments about some other point for an accelerating body even in pure translation.
In rigid body mechanics, Euler's second law of motion states ∑M_A = ^d/_dtH, which in 2D can be expressed as r_cm/A x a_cmm + I α
That the sum of the moments about a point other than the center of mass is non-zero does not mean that angular acceleration is non-zero, but only that the center of mass is accelerating either translationally or rotationally.
Page 95 of the textbook states "In 3D ... A couple may be required." Since the block on a ramp can reasonably be modeled in 2D, I see no reason for the existence of a couple.
You may argue that a different free body diagram example might be more appropriate for pedagogical reasons, but I do not believe that you have yet shown any technical errors with the current version. -AndrewDressel (talk) 17:11, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I argue that a different free body diagram example is more appropriate for pedagogical reasons, no I did not shown any technical errors with the current version.

Concerning the calculation, the english notation is a bit unsusual for me, and I don't have the time to write some math yet (maybe later). Here is thus a graphical consideration: mind that the N and F_f vectors are just the model of a mechanical action; there is just one mechanical action, the action of the ramp on the object, which can be represented by a single vector R, and this vector can be decomposed in N and F_f, see File:Reaction support avec et sans frottement alt.svg.

Now draw your diagram with just mg and R; if mg and R are not on the same line, then you have a couple, therfore an angular acceleration. -cdang|write me 15:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The current free body diagram shows the general case: the dimensions of the block, the angle of the ramp, the coefficient of friction, and the acceleration of the block are all unspecified. The forces generated by the ramp on the black may be modeled in a variety of ways. If we choose to model them with orthogonal frictional and normal components and then model the normal component as a single resultant force, the actual location where it may be considered to act can only be found in three particular situations without calculation: zero angle, zero friction, or zero acceleration. The current diagram happens to be correct for the middle case, zero friction, but that is not its goal, and it only implies angular acceleration if the translational acceleration is known to be not equal to

g(sin(\theta )-\mu cos(\theta ))

. Instead, this general case shows the use of the free body diagram as an analysis tool, not merely a graphical depiction of some precalculated result. The exact location of a single normal force is not known and so is merely placed in the middle.

Which free body diagram would you wish to show instead, and why? -AndrewDressel (talk) 02:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Organization of emergency medical assistance

An article that you have been involved in editing, Organization of emergency medical assistance, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organization of emergency medical assistance. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Medicellis (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful animation!

Bonjour Monsieur Chan! I'm helping my 12 year old son with his science homework on seismology, and encountered your very fine animation example of a transverse wave. As a fellow wikipedian, I just wanted to say merci beaucoup for your excellent contribution!

Take care! Walshga (talk) 16:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia commons

Greetings from a wanna be IYDU guy.

Currently i am moving away from wikimedia foundation in all senses, including Wikipedia commons and this project, and although i do sporadically edits from time to time, its certainly that i am unaware of any notice here or at commons; causes, well, personal lack of time i believe. I must tell you that i dont do any maintenance whether on my user page, talk page, here and on commons any longer since my decision is to leave this project at all,

And of course, there is no regret on my position.

However, i want to let you know, since i am not longer doing any kind of maintenance task on my media uploaded to wikicommons, i believe you are very well informed how to delete any orphan, unused media or copyvio you may consider on my list, so i let you be free to do any modification or deletion procedure as necesary on my files according to wikipedia policies. Cheers, and long live to democracy! :-), --HappyApple (talk) 09:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rêve: the Dream Ouroboros

The article Rêve: the Dream Ouroboros has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources to suggest notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Explodicle (T/C) 15:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hirth joint.jpg to Commons

If you can take care of it, please do. The Commons is not something I have taken the time to learn about yet. If you find any other images of mine that you think should be move there, feel free to move them. -AndrewDressel (talk) 13:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bragg in English

Thank you for replying!

Another very knowledgeable person whom I've been getting some help from said a very similar thing.. (that the Bragg equation applies to transmission as well as to reflection)

..but I haven't been able to figure out exactly how it does.

All of the derivations of Bragg's Law/Equation that I've been able to find (with a lot of looking) assume reflection, & I've just not been able to construct a diagram wherein the "scattering angle" (2 theta) ends up implying transmission rather than reflection.

If you could advise on that, that would be wonderful!

along the way, what's the allowable/reasonable range of 2 theta?

I do think I remember papers that have said, as you did, that the sample has to be very thin -- but my judgement is that that's because they were working with the kind of opals that show play-of-color via reflection. (as opposed to the ones I'm trying to understand, contra-luz, which show it only via transmission)

IOW, by construction of my problem, the specimen is transparent enough for light to be transmitted through them with negligable losses.

I don't know whether this will ring any bells or not, but my current best "guess" as to what's going on for transmissive PoC is that for those kinds of opal, there's no band gap.. (which is what causes the reflection in the reflective kind of opal - and thus their substantial optical density)

..but for C-L opals, there's no band gap - and so, no reflection - and so, transmission.

The resulting ~picture~ that I get for a C-L opal is that the incident beam interacts with the lattices of the domains just the way it does for reflective opals - except for the reflections -- and so, what's produced is (in effect?) exactly the same pattern of radiation as for a reflective opal, except emanating throughout a complete sphere, instead of just a half sphere (cut off by the reflection plane).

It seems to me that that would result on a PoC pattern that's very similar to what one would get from the X-Ray crystallography of a cubic crystal/

(I do wonder what the effect is of the domains that that light, in turn, encounters on its way through the specimen. Maybe this complication even means that a simple Bragg computation is inadequate for making a Bragg-type computation for the transmissive case. Correspondingly, my interest is more in what (eg: band gaps?) property of the domains determines reflection vs transmission.)

I realize that dealing with requests like this takes time, but I would enormously appreciate hearing about anything further this reawakes in your mind - and/or any people you can think of whom I might bother about this.

Thanks again,

 -- M.

--PMH232 (talk) 16:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1527:

I think I may have figured the Bragg part of this out: For transmission, theta has to be < 0. --PMH232 (talk) 20:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

121128 1538:

Thank you!

This has proven quite difficult to figure out by myself (w/ help from others). The web pages that I've found that address in detail beyond the Bragg simplifications of ... diffraction, isn't it? ... of a beam by regular lattices involve math that's kinda difficult itself.

Do you happen to know of a (web) reference that might be good for where I'm at? (or the area of science that this falls under?) (so that I can better choose keywords to search) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PMH232 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Croc (game designer)

The article Croc (game designer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very poorly sourced, and I can find no better references. The article is mostly about various computer games than about the person anyway.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Reyk _YO! 18:09, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Reyk: Hello,

I don't think Croc ever designed video games. He wrote tabletop roleplaying games. The article as such might not meet high standards, however, Croc is probably one of the most important French game designer and editor, at least one of his game was translated in English.

Regards

cdang|write me 12:44, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Character race has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Character race. Thanks! Joseph2302 (talk) 14:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Character race has now been accepted. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Joseph2302

cdang|write me 19:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bearing pressure, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Elasticity, Nathan and Hachette. 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) 09:37, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bearing pressure, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bolt and Adherence. 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) 09:14, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cdang. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cdang. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock 165.225.80.0/22

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Cdang (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

write me 08:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

165.225.80.76 is an open proxy. It's part of the zscaler network and serves to perform a man-in-the-middle attack. Unfortunately, you'll need to disable your use of it if you wish to edit on en.wiki. Yamla (talk) 12:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Yamla: Yes indeed my company uses ZScaler, and unfortunately I can't do anything about it. Thanks for your answer. Regards, cdang|write me 12:15, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know exactly what happens, but http://whatismyipaddress.com/ say my IP adress is 165.225.80.76 (connection at work). I can edit freely on fr and on wikidata.

Regards

cdang|write me 08:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cdang. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Green tensor" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Green tensor and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 21#Green tensor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]