User talk:Vortexrealm/Archive 3

ARCHIVE 3

The Environmental Barnstar

		The Environmental Barnstar
		You really deserve this barnstar for your fabulous work on waste management articles. OhanaUnited 01:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Now I realize that the barnstar you gave me (The working man's barnstar) can be subsituted by the Environmental Barnstar since it's more specific and towards environment. Mind if you make that switch? OhanaUnited 23:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ohana, the barnstar was awarded for all the categorisation work for the different environment articles you processed. I thought this was the relevant barnstar to be awarded. Feel free to change it if you like. --Alex 07:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to Environmental Record Task Force

Hi Vortexrealm,
Several editors have organized a new task force to make sure the encyclopedia accurately represents the environmental impact of corporations and policymakers. I'm looking at your award/edit history and hoping you might be interested in lending your skills and expertise. Please come by and have a look!
Thanks,
Cyrusc 20:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Portal review

Hey Alex, after a few days of hard work, I managed to get Portal:Environment into decent shape. Would you like to give a portal peer review on this portal? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

You mean the ones in {{Environmental technology}}? I will add that in. But right now my main concern is the selected biographies section because biographies needs to be expanded. Three individuals don't seem to be enough in that section. Do you know any well known environmentalist?

Side note, I got accepted in University of Toronto's co-op program in environmental science biology stream. It's time to work in the field, working with real environmentalists, as opposed to sitting in boring lectures listening to what the profs say. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for those names, I'll take a look at them shortly and add them in. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

India & Waste Management

In our country, the concept of Solid Waste Management originally started after 1994. It was due to pnumonic plague in Surat and a litigation filed by an activist that people and government started thinking about managing waste. Earlier it was only sanitation. Our organization initiated waste management operations in 1996 and now catering to almost 30 million population. It is Centre for Development communication and has spread in 9 states of India.

Unsigned User:Vivekjpr

Featured portal candidate

I just nominated Portal:Environment as Featured portal candidate. Please vote at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Environment OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 09:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

waste-to-energy <-> incineration

Hi Alex,

I saw that you merged the two articles on wte and incineration. Splendid idea!

But you still seem to treat the two terms differently. Is that how the words are used in the UK? A am working professionally with incineration plants in Scandinavia, and they certainly does not fit into the description in the article - they would all be waste-to-energy plants. We definitely use the two terms interchangably, the latter most often when addressing people with little prior knowledge on what it is.

Do you percieve any difference?

Claus

Hi Claus,

Thanks for the comments. My aim is to separate what the industry terms waste-to-energy plants and energy-from-waste plants, which generally means incineration. Perhaps this indicates a degree of linguistic detoxification against the stigma associated with old incineration facilities. Literally energy from waste includes anaerobic digestion, gasification & pyrolysis amongst other technologies. I have aimed for the advanced WtE facilities to be covered and differentiated in the main incineration article. The waste to energy article therefor covers all forms of waste to energy and not simply the terms that advanced incineration facilities have encompassed. Hope this explains the logic.

Alex

Can any non-member of the WikiProject Environment project post a WikiProject Environment template on an article Talk page and also assess the article?

To be specific, anonymous user Jbntj, who is not listed as a member of the project, posted a WikiProject Environment template of the Talk page of Fossil fuel power plant some time ago and also assessed it as a Stub Class. Is that proper? I cannot imagine anyone considering Fossil fuel power plant to be a Stub Class. It is a very large article with 16 sections, numerous diagrams, photos and references.

I might add that anonymous user Jbntj also added a WikiProject Climate Change template to Fossil fuel power plant, altho he is also not listed as a participant in that project.

And recently, he added a Cleanup tag to Fossil fuel power plant and refuses to explain why on the Talk page of that article other than to say the article is "dirty".

A very careful reading of the "Contributions" page of anonymous user Jbntj discloses that he has done this sort of thing on many energy related articles. In my opinion, he is very biased against use of coal or oil because he feels they bear a major responsibility for global warming. Wikipedia has dozens of articles devoted to global warming and climate change where anyone can contribute content or discuss their feelings about coal and oil. However, I don't believe posting WikiProject templates on technical articles about the use of coal and oil is a proper method of trying to promote biased opinions against such articles. Fossil fuel power plants are a fact of life and Wikipedians have every right to create and to contribute NPOV content to technical articles explaining how coal and oil fired power plants are designed and used.

I will be very interested to learn what members of this WikiProject Environment have to say about my above comments. Alex, please reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment. - mbeychok 01:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment

Do you think the scope needs to be changed as per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment#Can any non-member of this project post a WikiProject Environment template on an article Talk page and also assess the article? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 12:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at what Ghetsmith has done to the Talk page of Fossil fuel power plant

He reverted OhanaUnited's very recent change from Class:Stub to Class:B for the WikiProject Environment template. It is now back to Class:Stub.

He also replaced the WikiProject Climate Change template which OhanaUnited had very recently deleted.

He then archived selected portions of the Talk page comments so that it now contains mostly just discussions of the environmental aspects.

It seems that some user (or some group of users) is bent on turning the Fossil fuel power plant into propaganda about the environmental and global warming evils attributable to power plants. I find it difficult to believe that it is just coincidental that users Jbntj and Ghetsmith happened to come along at about the same time.

Take a look at Ghetsmith's Talk page. Is there anything that can be done to stop this behavior? - mbeychok 05:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mbeychok, just looking at the article the logic for assessing the article as b for energy and stub for environment could be due to the fact there is not a huge amount of information regarding the environment in the main article. I was under the understanding however the rating scale was for the article on the whole, although I confess I am not fully up to speed with the rating proceedure. I would think their edits should be followed. If you believe they are sock puppets for one user and you have some proof it should be reported to an adminitrator to take up. Hope this helps --Alex 07:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Some thoughts about the article Anaerobic digestion

Alex, in response to your request, I have very briefly scanned the Anaerobic digestion article and it appears to be well-written, very thorough and very well formatted.

The major thing that caught my attention is that there was no definition of what is meant by the word "anaerobic" and no mention of the fact that aerobic processes utilize free gaseous oxygen (or air) whereas anaerobic processes do not use free gasous oxygen (or air). In other words, anaerobic process occur in an oxygen free environment. Here are two paragraphs from my book Aqueous Wastes from Petroleum and Petrochemical Plants published by John Wiley in 1967:

In an aerobic system using free gaseous oxygen (or air), the end products are primarily CO₂ and H₂O which are the stable or oxidized forms of carbon and hydrogen. If the organic waste contains nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur, then the end products may also include NO₃⁻, PO₄⁻⁻⁻, and SO₄⁻⁻.

In an anaerobic system, there is an absence of free gaseous oxygen. The oxygen source may be the organic waste itself or it may be supplied by inorganic oxides (in the waste). When the oxygen source in an anaerobic system is derived from the organic waste itself, then the 'intermediate' end products are (primarily) organic alcohols, aldehydes, and acids plus CO₂. In the presence of specialized methane bacteria or microbes, the intermediates are converted to the 'final' end products of CH₄ and more CO₂.

I suggest that the Anaerobic digestion article include a paragraph or two similar to the above paragraphs. Obviously, my two paragraphs would have to be modified to match the wording used in the article and to mention that sulfur in the waste would be converted into hydrogen sulfide (rather than sulfates as in an aerobic process).

Also, in the section "Biogas refinement", there is this statement: If they are high, levels of hydrogen sulphide may need to be altered due to the toxic nature of the gas. In my opinion, that sentence is too weak. There is no question but that hydrogen sulfide must be removed. In the USA, our national government's environmental protection agency U.S. EPA has mandated that industrial facilities may not burn any fuel gas that contains more than 160 ppm by volume (0.016 percent by volume) of hydrogen sulfide. The air quality regulatory agency in Southern California (the SCAQMD) has gone even further and mandated that fuel gas contain no more that 40 ppm by volume (0.004 percent by volume) of hydrogen sulfide. I am fairly sure that many other countries also require that fuel gas contain very little hydrogen sulfide. I think the article should make it clear that hydrogen sulfide levels in the end product biogas must be very, very low.

I hope this helps. Regards, - mbeychok 19:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

After a brief look, I find the article has little references. References is the first step of attempting to get the article to GA, A, or FA status. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I have reviewed. In addition to mbeychok's comments, I still think the article has too little reference. Check Talk:Anaerobic digestion#GA Review for details. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 22:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on your hard work, the article is now a GA! OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 13:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Belated reply...

Hey Alex... sorry, only just got your message. I've been at Wikimania and then travelling for a wedding... much catching up to do. Will look at those pages soon.

There's some interesting stuff happening at Appropedia too, with arranging content for the OLPC machines. Will probably get in touch with you about that soon. --Chriswaterguy talk 21:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Chartered Institute of Marketing

The original, longer article was at The Chartered Institute of Marketing, which was speedily deleted under WP:CSD#G11 as an advertisement (upon checking that article, it did seem to be written with a very promotional tone). The version I deleted didn't assert any kind of notability, which made it speedily deleteable under WP:CSD#A7. You can recreate it again, since based on the first deleted article the organisation definitely appears to be notable, be sure to assert its notability and provide some sources, and avoid being overly promotional. --Coredesat 10:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll userfy it. Try to work on this quickly since it definitely fails G11 in its current form and could be speedied again. --Coredesat 20:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Unknown article

Thanks for your comments. The article was especially prepared by me for Wikipedia and not lifted from elsewhere. It is based on more than 25 years of a career in technical and scientific work within the soft drinks industry, that includes having been R&D manager of an international soft drinks company and scientific consultant to the industry. It is because I am retired that there are no longer barriers to worry about in addressing such a sensitive subject. The topic was given considerable publicity in the UK media (radio & various consumer programmes on TV such as "4 What It's Worth", "Watchdog", "You and Yours" etc) during the 1980s to the mid 1990s, that eventually forced the industry, including the BSI, to take action and reduce the explosion hazards both with glass (explosion) and PET bottles (missiling). In this respect the UK is ahead of other countries in taking corrective action. The topic is well established in the public domain, but not addressed scientifically, by Wikipedia or, indeed any other enclycopedias. As I stated elsewhere, I have avoided referring to my own publications, for obvious reasons, but have included DTI-sponsored studies, inter alia, that refer to my work.

I really have no objection as to where the article goes and am looking for experienced wikipedians to find a suitable location.

--Edward Willhoft 11:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Edward, I am not sure what the above comments relate to. I do not believe I have been involved in editing any piece you have contributed to. It surely doesn't refer to the above composting compost discussion.--Alex 08:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

re: Anaerobic Digestion spam

Hello, I added our company's website link to the Anaerobic Digestion website, but did not realize that this constituted "spam." Thank you for the clarification! Best, Charles R. Stack, MPH, Vice President of 2Ci.comCStack3 01:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Sustainability and Energy Development

Template:Sustainability and Energy Development has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Chriswaterguy talk 12:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

שלום

שלום, סתם מעניין אותי לדעת איך זה שגרת בתל אביב? :-) GOER 09:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Very nice :) what were you doing there? GOER 19:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Just to let you know I've reverted the article "Recycling in the United Kingdom" back to your version after someone left some junk content in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SheffGruff (talk • contribs) 17:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:ArrowBio and Hiriya.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:ArrowBio and Hiriya.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell ^babelfish 19:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Environment portal link template

No, I have not. Do you want to make it? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 13:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank-you...

..for a most unexpected present. I spend most of my time dithering about at WP:ISLE, but if you think I can help out with anything environment-related just let me know. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Re your request that I take another look at Anaerobic digestion

Alex: It looks darn good to me. However, I have no specific comments other than those I gave you a few month ago when you asked me to first look at it. Good luck with your efforts to get it recognized as a Featured Article. I apologize for not being able to reply sooner. Regards, - mbeychok 01:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Water

I wasn't sure where to start with this, from Water#As_a_solvent:

An advantage of water is that biological processing of wastewater is easy and treated wastewater can be safely led into the sea or a river. However, if the contaminants are toxic and not processable biologically, wastewater has to be incinerated, which is expensive.

Easy? Wastewater incinerated? I guess it's a long article and simplification is needed... but thought you might have ideas on rewording. --Chriswaterguy talk 16:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

re: anaerobic digester vendors

Thanks for your kind acceptance of my apology for spamming the AD site! 8-0 Having an article about companies who build these things might be helpful to both the public and the business community, although I realise that this is not in Wikipedia's charter.

Are you in the UK? I won the Biotechnology Means Business award in 1997 for my AD system, built for Buckfast Spinning Co. LTD in Devon, inside of the boundries of Dartmoor National Park. Please visit my spam site errrr...website at www.2Ci.com for more information if you are interested.

We are seeing a huge surge of interest in these things, although I've been doing it nonstop for 25 years! Thanks for the AD site, it is excellent. Cheers, Charles R. Stack, MPH —Preceding unsigned comment added by CStack3 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Anaerobic digestion

Alex, as requested I have been reviewing the Anaerobic digestion article which is an immense improvement on the stub that I originally started editing. It is a considerable credit to the few main contributors and editors.

However, I do have some reservations and I have made one edit to try and set it better in its wider context. To me anaerobic digestion describes the process that occurs whenever organic material exists in a micro-organism rich anaerobic environment. These processes have been harnessed by man to great benefit in a range of different ways which, incidentally, include cold lagoon digestion which I don't think gets a mention. The article reads very much as a description of the thermophilic industrial process and is very weak on the underlying microbiology and the range of occurrences in natural and semi-natural eco-systems. There is also one section on aerobic digestion which seems out of place here.If I can and will try and apply some more balancing edits and I hope you will let me know if you think I'm barking up the wrong tree. Velela 18:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Great work so far, this article is clearly a good source of information on the topic. There are still some things that could be improved. I left a note on organization on the talk page, and I re-wrote the biogas section to reduce the redundancy there. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 19:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Master of Business & Technology

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Master of Business & Technology, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Doc^g 14:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Buckinghamshire Incinerator

An article that you have been involved in editing, Buckinghamshire Incinerator, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buckinghamshire Incinerator. Thank you. Roleplayer (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

water tank

Hi i would like to know the best way to clean a plastic water tank that has been in flood waters. we are concerned about residual bacteria and the tanks are completely dry now. Love to hear back from you travellingbenny at gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.67.77.119 (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Water advice and deleted articles

Water advice: A couple of people I know through Appropedia are working on a project in Sierra Leone that will include improving their access to safe water for personal use. They're looking for people they can call on for advice - I've put my hand up, and also suggested you. If you're interested, send me an email at my username at appropedia.org.

Deleted articles: If you're finding some of your articles (on waste treatment or other sustainability/development topics) are not accepted at Wikipedia, then they'd be more than welcome at Appropedia. Apart from having different criteria for inclusion, we also are less enthusiastic about deleting things. --Chriswaterguy talk 00:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

favour

Dear Vortexrealm, I was hoping you might do me a small favour. I am very interested in the use of autoclaves for waste treatment, and as you seem to have some expertise and to be very public spirited, I was hoping I might be able to as you a couple of questions. Of course there is no reason why you should, and if you don't have time I quite understand. with best wishes

Casagiada  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casagiada (talk • contribs) 13:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC) 

In vessel composting

Hi Vortex,

Are the original author of the in-vessel composting article?

I have some concerns over the process being described and feel it does not reflect what would commonly be refered to as in-vessel composting in the UK and Europe, ie a concrete tunnel system (such as Agrivert and Cambridge Recycling use) or upright metal chambers (such as VCU).

I'd welcome your comment on this, I feel that a member of the public using Wiki for info on systems being built in the UK will not get the right information as the article stands.

I considered re-writing myself, but wanted to discuss this with you, and also considred asking the Composting Association to submit a more detailed article.

Hope you get back to me,

jacobdog —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacobdog (talk • contribs) 13:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Coskata

I see you want the Coskata article to be deleted because you think it's an ad. You are mistaken. It's not an ad. I don't work for them. I have nothing to do with them. I just have a strong interest in science, technology, and alternative energy. Grundle2600 (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi again.

When the article was first created, the only source used was an article from the International Herald Tribune. But yes, now the article does look a lot like an ad. If you want to delete it, I won't object anymore. Grundle2600 (talk) 16:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Potential update to IVC article

Hi Alex,

Thank for reply to posting 31. If I have time then I may draft an alternative article but will not update this without your approval. Knowing me however it could be 12 months before I get round to this so don't hold your breath. Regards, David Robertson, SITA UK Ltd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacobdog (talk • contribs) 18:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

MBT questions

I'm an italian engeneering student and I've contacted you because there are a few points about Mechanical Biological waste Treatment that are not completely clear to me. Are MBT plants a good alternative to waste-to-energy plants? How much money does an MBT plant costs? How big is an MBT plant? Is it true that the plant is energetically self-sufficient thanks to the production of biogas through the anaerobic digestion? Does the plant produce toxic smokes? Everything I know about MBT comes from the omonymous page on Wikipedia, can you suggest me other sources of informations?

please contact me at: maurizio86@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaurizioP1986 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

(As sent via email)

Hello Maurizio

Following your post on wikipedia here are some answers to your questions:

Are MBT plants a good alternative to waste-to-energy plants?

Yes a very good alternative especially where there is a lot of opposition to incineration, where there are drivers for the best environmental solution and where additional revenues can be gained from green energy.

How much money does an MBT plant costs?

Clearly this depends on the size and type of technology you are looking at. Smaller plants cost in the region of 20 million Euro (a very rough budgetary figure)

How big is an MBT plant?

MBT plants size is normally dependent upon the front end sorting element. The plants that we and HAASE supply start at around 50,000 tonnnes per annum.

Is it true that the plant is energetically self-sufficient thanks to the production of biogas through the anaerobic digestion?

Yes, there is usually a net export of electricity from an anaerobic digestion based MBT plant. A composting or biodrying MBT plant does not however produce any energy.

Does the plant produce toxic smokes?

No, the only emissions from an MBT plant come from the exhaust gases from the gas engines. Biogas can contain a small amount of H2S which is toxic however there are mechanisms to prevent its formation in the digesters and does not reach the exhaust gases in high concentrations.

Everything I know about MBT comes from the omonymous page on Wikipedia, can you suggest me other sources of informations?

Enviros waste technology site

http://www.waste-technology.co.uk/

The Juniper MBT report is a comprehensive study of many different MBT processes. Its a couple of years old now but contains very good information:

http://www.juniper.co.uk/Publications/mbt_report.html

More information can be found on HAASE technologies at the following pages www.clarke-energy.com and www.haase.de.

Hope this helps.

--Alex Marshall (talk) 11:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Moon Landfill

I have always wanted to start an article about the possibility for landfills on the Moon but I have no idea where to start. You appear to be an expert on waste management so I was hoping you could help me. Do you know of any websites I could use to get information on such a topic? Also, I would like to know if you have any interest in being Secretary of Energy. --Uga Man (talk) UGA MAN FOR PRESIDENT 2008 17:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello there Uga man, the costs associated with landfilling on the moon would be a tad prohibitive. Considering a large part of the world doesnt spend money on landfilling on Earth I don't think people would be quite ready to put rubbish on a rocket and launch it skywards. Mind you, stranger things have happened.

Being a citizen of the UK and environmentally minded I don't think I would be high on the candidate list for the US Secretary of Energy.

Cheers--Alex Marshall (talk) 13:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:AB_and_transfer_station.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AB_and_transfer_station.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 10:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hebrew spelling

Hi,

Nice try correcting the Hebrew spelling of Ramat Hovav.

I corrected it completely now.

A tip: You can try getting a hint at the correct spelling from the interwiki links. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:District heating plant spittelau ssw crop1.png

A tag has been placed on Image:District heating plant spittelau ssw crop1.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

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 [[ Talk:Image:District heating plant spittelau ssw crop1.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sdrtirs (talk) 06:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Why am I leaving Wikipedia?

Take a good look at my user page! I believe it documents that fact that I have been a long time contributor of good articles related to my many years of engineering experience.

So why have I decided to leave Wikipedia? Because I have grown weary of the revisions made by unexperienced people who think they know a subject when they really don't know it. I am also weary of people who make revisions because they "know better than anyone else". In particular, the actions of one young postgrad student who calls himself Headbomb with whom it is impossible to reason because of his firm belief that he is infallible ... and that he and only he "knows better than anyone else". His attitude has finally been the last straw in making my decision to leave Wikipedia. I am simply tired of trying to reason with the likes of Headbomb.

Goodbye to all the friends I did make here in the past two and a half years or so.

mbeychok (talk) 06:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Did You Know problem

Hi. I've reviewed your DYK submission for the article anaerobic digestion, and made a comment on it at the submissions page. Please feel free to reply or comment there. Cheers, Art LaPella (talk) 05:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)