User:Mion/artalk3

Main Page redesign

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, Pretzels^Talk! 12:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Main Page redesign

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, Pretzels^Talk! 12:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Energy technology

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Energy technology, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Energy technology is a test page.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Energy technology, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 10:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Liquid hydrogen tank car

Sorry -- when I deleted the article, the content was {{Speedy deletion|Content moved to article [[Tank car]], as a 'liquid hydrogen tank car' is a subtype of a 'tank car'}}. I should have looked at the history. I've restored. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Maintaining a seperate page for a single type of Tank car is unjustified. The content of Liquid Hydrogen Tank Car can be easily included without causing unnecessary fuss for readers. HarveyHenkelmann (talk) 23:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs Photohydrogen Battery charger Monatomic Ton of oil equivalent Ballard Power Systems Biomass to liquid Sustainable industries Bergius process Renewable energy development ATREX Dehydrogenate Galinstan Rio Declaration on Environment and Development Zero-emissions vehicle Tuner (radio) HOPE Curriculum National Center for Hydrogen Technology Selenide Osmium

Cleanup Fuel Desalination Hydrogen spectral series Merge Methanol economy Secondary cell Town gas Add Sources Law of definite proportions Battery electric vehicle Maldevelopment Wikify Ecosystem services EROEI Surface energy Expand HVC 127-41-330 Honda Civic Hybrid Jet Propulsion Laboratory

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) 19:44, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Please consider compromise

The rewording I suggested on talk:gNewSense is extremely fair to the FSF. Grandscribe explicily agreed with it. Gronky did not offer any opinion at all, as far as I can see. Please consider compromising rather than continuing to edit war without any attempt at discussion; I would very much rather this ended now than continued to be an issue until such point as permanent administrative action is required. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Chris, extremely fair is POV, until now I tried not to engage to much in discussions about GNU and Linux, as i'm not an active member on both, but I take this warning as serious. cheers Mion (talk) 01:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You have, however, engaged in continous reverts related to the subject. If you are not prepared to debate the issue is good faith, I would advise you to reconsider getting into edit wars on the subject - especially when you are the only one on your side of the ideological issue doing so. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Is that so ? after my revert, Gronky edited, at first sight, you are the only one for the change. don't push it. Mion (talk) 01:41, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

He made no mention of the issue on the talk page, on his talk page (where I had already informed him) or in any edit summary. Not every checks the page histories. If Gronky disagrees he can say so. Until then, silence implies consensus. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

As i mentioned on the other page, all people involved, you, me, gronky, etc. have a history in the discussion, so claiming that people didn't respond in the last 48H isn't advancing your stance. Cheers Mion (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

spam links

Dear Mion,

Thanks for the note. i am aware of the no follow links, but I genuinely believed that the links I added have added value by pointing people to up to day sources of information form experts.

Can you tell my why my links are inappropriate?

Thanks

Dave A

Hi Dave, yes i can, its documented in WP:SPAM and WP:COI, selfpromotion... Cheers Mion (talk) 23:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

further

OK - just had a look at the article and the links removed - really don;t see the problem, but you are the experts - please enlighten me. do they have no value or do they need to be targeted more. I have added hundreds of general links to third party sources in the past, and few have been argued with or deleted. Since i have now help build a collective set of expertise, it seems appropriate to link it in to wikipedia and this i have tried to do. i clearly do not want to be banned or accused of spamming, so please give me some accurate guidance on what I can and cannot add? For example I have now obtained some accurate information on Danish wind energy exports, which I was going to add, but am a bit scared of being accused of spamming - please advise....http://www.claverton-energy.com/download/173/

thanks

dave A

Hi Dave, there is guidance on WP for what you can or cannot add, you can read Wikipedia:Reliable sources first, if you think that it doesn't apply to your website, the best thing to do is to discuss it on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cheers Mion (talk) 09:33, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

German editing stats

No, I didn't exclude bot edits (if there is a way of easily identifying them then I might be able to add this). I did do an update but forgot I'd posted the statistics on-wiki - they are there now. Hut 8.5 10:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, the list now includes bots. I've counted contributions from the users in the bot list you linked to as bot edits, and deducted them from the edits by registered users. Hut 8.5 16:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that - good to see the stats are about right. Happy new year to you as well. Hut 8.5 21:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I've run the same analysis on two other large Wikipedias that have implemented flagged revisions, but I only have about a month's worth of data at the moment (so we can't draw conclusions from it). Hut 8.5 19:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I think I've done what you want, see User:Hut 8.5/DEWP reviewer stats and User:Hut 8.5/DEWP review rate stats. Hut 8.5 19:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Note: de:Spezial:Log/newusers, automatisch erstellt=SUL. Mion (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2009 (UTC) ‎

Yes, that was the time range. The format of the times is YYYY-MM-DD-HH. I've now updated both data sets with data from a more recent database dump, so they now go into December 2008. Hut 8.5 21:15, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

If someone makes 99 sighter edits they get listed in the 1, 5, 10, 20 and 50 figures, so if you try to work out the totals just by adding up the figures you are going to count some users more than once (and hence you get a huge overestimate of the number of sighters). The total number of people with at least one sighter edit (from those statistics) is 4949, and the number of people who can make sighter edits is 5653 (from de:Spezial:Statistik). Hut 8.5 08:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I've run that analysis and put it on the talk page. The analysis program found a total of 1578272 sighter edits. Hut 8.5 07:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The table total is always going to be a slight underestimate. If someone makes 55 edits they are included in the 50 row but not the 100 row, and so the total underestimates their count by 5 edits. Multiply this discrepancy by a few thousand users and it will add up to a big difference. The only way to get it completely right is to do the rows in intervals of 1 and thereby get every edit counted. The 1578272 figure does not include automatic reviews. Hut 8.5 14:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Edits by users who can sight pages are included, but if someone marks a revision as sighted then I don't think that's included in the statistics, since it's a log action and not an edit. Hut 8.5 17:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Bad article

Mion, since you are doing a lot of work on science oriented articles I would like to ask you to take a look at this article: Veljko Milković. I have eliminated a lot of nonsense from this guy's article in the past. This nut-case subject with his perpetuum mobile now even has a fan club. I was going to erase the addition of 28 december by Carnegie as it is incomprehensible, I would like yours as a second opinion. One might even wonder if this article is a proper subject for wikipedia, however, I don't know how the english wiki deals with this. --VanBurenen (talk) 22:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi vanBurenen, i'm not into science, the article is well referenced, selfmade youtube videos and peswiki, thats smells like hoax, reading the talkpage and the first AFD, the article might survive a second afd, so best the best approach is maybe to keep the part ecohouse and eco inventions intact and keep the line about free energy with pseudo science and delete the rest as non referenced. In short i support AFD-2 and maybe Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard is a place for general discussion, hope it helps. Cheers Mion (talk) 01:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Somebody else picked it up: [1]. You may vote :). Thanks for the link to the "Fringe theories noticeboard". Great reading. --VanBurenen (talk) 12:17, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I Did -:)Mion (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Flagged Revs

Hi,

I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 07:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

On a separate note, I believe that you have your percentages backwards in your post at Wikipedia talk:Flagged revisions/Trial please see my reply there. Unless I am the one reading it wrong. Dbiel ^(Talk) 05:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Flagged Revisions/Trial

Thanks for the note Mion! I made this change not for any other reason than to shorten the whole blinking thing down! That page at 370K was taking almost 3.5 minutes to download on my PDA!

I did consult with some very experienced editors before carrying this out, and it was felt that subpaging the article and transcluding the results back onto the main page was the best all-round solution to shorten the main article.

Thanks for your comments though, they're always welcomed! Thor Malmjursson (talk) 16:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Transparent trial

Hi Mion, thanks for your note! As I'm more or less inactive because of issues in real life, I've stopped following the discussions about FlaggedRevs. So I'm not sure whether you just wanted to drop me a note or whether you expected an answer from me. In that case, would it still be useful to write something there? (even in case it may take another couple of days?) Please let me know what you meant, I'd be happy to answer if I just knew what I'm supposed to do;-) Regards, --X-Weinzar (talk) 00:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Radioactive waste

It was fixed before your edit screwed it up. Repository research is NOT limited to salt domes, but is occuring in many media. Your changes erroneously limit it to salt domes. Wrong. It was better as it was before, so if you can't keep from making it worse, why not leave it alone? Mervyn Emrys (talk) 13:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Needless duplication of information in another article is frowned upon and unnecessary. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 14:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs KBS-3 Ton of oil equivalent Röntgen equivalent man Sustainable industries Back side bus Crystal filter Osmium HOPE Curriculum Dehydrogenate Ballard Power Systems Ray Magliozzi Throat lozenge Photohydrogen Tom Magliozzi Decay energy ATREX Diapir Variable frequency transformer Rio Declaration on Environment and Development

Cleanup Biofuel Desalination Net energy gain Merge Town gas Steam reforming General Motors Sequel Add Sources Law of definite proportions Maldevelopment Ocean thermal energy conversion Wikify Survivors of the September 11, 2001 attacks Neutron radiation Ecosystem services Expand Breakdown (film) Vestas 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) 20:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Sighted

Thank you for verifying my English, but i can't understand why you did this and this edits. Pls check it.Carn (talk) 19:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Link to German wikipedia

Hello, Mion!

I'm new to wikipedia, so please say me what's wrong about the link to the German wikipedia in the article Liquid hydrogen, diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Liquid_hydrogen&diff=277657960&oldid=277633728 MaBoehm (talk) 13:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs Osnabrück Nassau (state) HOPE Curriculum Photohydrogen Ray Magliozzi Münster (region) Baden-Württemberg Lithium hydride Tom Magliozzi Bochum KBS-3 Complex hydride Leine ATREX Widukind Ballard Power Systems Proton conductor Röntgen equivalent man Bremen (state)

Cleanup Magdeburg Fly ash Yucca Mountain Merge Generation IV reactor Fast breeder reactor Extrinsic protein Add Sources Nascent hydrogen Continental AG Hydrogen fluoride laser Wikify Light water reactor Creep (deformation) Plymouth Brethren Expand Münster HVC 127-41-330 Civet

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) 19:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 19:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Installation permitting guidance for hydrogen and fuel cells stationary applications

The article Installation permitting guidance for hydrogen and fuel cells stationary applications has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:

Installation permitting guidance for hydrogen and fuel cells stationary applications – news, books, scholar Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient 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. Abductive (reasoning) 03:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs North Rhine-Westphalia Saarland Nassau (state) Rhineland-Palatinate Röntgen equivalent man Aalen Nuclear energy Brandenburg Schleswig-Holstein Leine Proton conductor Neutron emission Dortmund KBS-3 Munich Re Magdeburg Thuringia Green gross domestic product Saxony

Cleanup Trier Desalination Transport in Germany Merge Deuterium Spodumene Passive solar Add Sources Rotenburg (district) Delmenhorst Hanover (region) Wikify Ecoforestry Lublin R-XIII Imatra Expand Osnabrück Ballard Power Systems Continental AG

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) 13:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Flagged Revisions

You may may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Flagged Revisions. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs Nuclear energy Röntgen equivalent man Brandenburg North Rhine-Westphalia Proton conductor Green gross domestic product Rhineland-Palatinate KBS-3 Sustainable industries Dortmund Neutron emission Stellar atmosphere Magdeburg Munich Re Sigmaringen Leine Thuringia Refraction (metallurgy) Saarland

Cleanup Trier Transport in Germany Yucca Mountain Merge Deuterium Spodumene Fast breeder reactor Add Sources Rotenburg (district) Calenberg Delmenhorst Wikify Desalination Ecoforestry Lublin R-XIII Expand Osnabrück Battery electric vehicle Münster

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) 16:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Handbook for approval of hydrogen refuelling stations

The article Handbook for approval of hydrogen refuelling stations has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
Handbook for approval of hydrogen refuelling stations – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient 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. Abductive (reasoning) 23:15, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Installation permitting guidance for hydrogen and fuel cells stationary applications

An article that you have been involved in editing, Installation permitting guidance for hydrogen and fuel cells stationary applications, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Installation permitting guidance for hydrogen and fuel cells stationary applications. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Abductive (reasoning) 23:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Tom Dixon (industrial designer)

Hi Mion/artalk3! A biography which you have either created, contributed to, or edited, is completely unreferenced and carries a possible promotional tone (see: COI). All articles, especially biographies, must be neutral and adequately sourced to avoid being deleted. If you can help with these issues, please visit Talk:Tom Dixon (industrial designer), and improve the article. --Kudpung (talk) 23:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs Leine Green gross domestic product Saarland Röntgen equivalent man Sustainable industries Refraction (metallurgy) North Rhine-Westphalia Rhineland-Palatinate Thuringia Proton conductor Magdeburg Exploitation of natural resources KBS-3 Nuclear energy Saxony Neutron emission Stellar atmosphere Brandenburg Munich Re

Cleanup Trier Yucca Mountain Desalination Merge Spodumene Passive solar Deuterium Add Sources Rotenburg (district) Delmenhorst Calenberg Wikify Ecoforestry Lublin R-XIII Imatra Expand Osnabrück Münster Ballard Power Systems

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) 23:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

HCNG in see also sections

I wanted to let you know that I reverted a few of these wikilinks you added to several city articles. Although I presume that you're trying to indicate that these places have HCNG facilities, you have to realize that that fact is simply insignificant in the context of a general article about the city. If there was a way to naturally work it into the prose—like if there was a discussion on the page of the transportation infrastructure of a particular place, maybe that would work (and you should still avoid undue emphasis on minor topics). But to just add it to "See also" means that even if someone read the entire article, they wouldn't have a clue why they might also want to read the HCNG page. My advice would be to just let the HCNG article stand on its own. TheFeds 15:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Well. i dont agree with you, removing the links is considered vandalism, we add content to the articles, not remove it, The HCNG stations in question like in India are part of the upcoming olympics, Cheers Mion (talk) 16:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

Not to say that people from these communities can very well handle see also links and dont need a TheFeds as a filter of content. Mion (talk) 16:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

So let me get this straight: you're saying that editorial changes to remove extraneous links are vandalism? And you are proposing that we only add, and never remove or move information from articles? I don't think that's a consensus view.... (By contrast, I'm assuming that the consensus is more accurately described in WP:SEEALSO.)

And what exactly do you mean by "The HCNG stations in question like in India are part of the upcoming olympics"? There are no currently-planned Olympics in India, and even if the HCNG stations are associated with the Olympics, that has nothing to do with cities that have no relation to the Olympics, like Toulouse or Ft. Collins. And if the relationship to the Olympics has any importance, why isn't it mentioned (and referenced) in the article about HCNG?

It's fine to disagree, and if you want, we can solicit others' opinions on the matter, maybe at the Talk:HCNG page. I've got no issue with the majority of your edits, but if I can't understand the relevance of that link in those articles, and you don't explain it anywhere, do you really think that an unfamiliar reader (or even a reader from one of those places) will see the significance? TheFeds 16:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, An explanation is in place, at first, the added links are not spam or vandalism, we agree on that, the removal argument is, people dont know what HCNG is, first of all local people of these communities do, the problem is inhere you dont have any knowledge about it and assume other people are in the same position. Which is not the case. For example India gets 2 Dwarka and Faridabad and maybe a third HCNG station Its in the national newspaper and the local newspapers . Its not only the stations, each cost a $ 1.000.000 and you also need a local fleet which uses HCNG. It all gets broadcasted in the media. Before there was similar circus in Dunkerque, Grenoble and Toulouse (France) a project from the European Union, The american cities are covered by DOE same story. Cheers Mion (talk) 17:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

FYI: New Delhi: Athletes and officials staying at the 2010 Commonwealth Games Village may get to travel on vehicles that will run on a newage green fuel. Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) has asked the government for land at the Village site to set up a hydrogen-CNG (HCNG) filling station. Mion (talk) 17:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

Maybe we can discuss the restoring of the see also links ? as there are no bad faith edits involved and the explanation is provided ? thanks Mion (talk) 17:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

The central problem I have with your addition of that link is that an average reader who looks at it will have no idea why it's important to that city. (They're reading about a city, and suddenly, there's a link to some sort of fuel technology, with no hint as to its relevance and significance.) For example, look at Dunkirk: the other links in "See also" are Dunkirk Treaty, Dunkirkers and French Flemish. The relevance of the first two is obvious, and the third describes a culturally significant dialect originating in that region (and Flemish is mentioned several times in the article). How is HCNG even remotely relevant compared to those things that deal with the culture and history of the city?

The secondary issue is that if this technology is so important to the residents of those cities, why isn't there a description on the HCNG page of that importance? (After all, if you're not describing why it's important in the city articles, you need to explain somewhere, in order to make use of those references you collected.) All it says is that there are filling stations in several cities.

I appreciate that you've given an explanation, but I really don't think we should put those links back in at this point. As an alternative, for those cities where you have a reliable source describing the local significance of the HCNG project, why not explain it (in prose) in the "Transportation" or "Infrastructure" sections of those individual city articles? If it really is important, then it's fair to describe it in the article text—and if it's not actually that important, then it's best to leave it out completely. TheFeds 18:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

There is totally no need to centralyze this discussion, and aldo you do pretend to discuss, its talking against the wall with you. [End of messages] Mion (talk) 18:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

A meta-argument is your response? (Didn't you read {{usertalkback}} at the top of my user talk page? We are continuing the discussion I started on your page, after all.)

As for the substance of the dispute, I think I've been quite clear and reasonable. TheFeds 19:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

You ignore the fact that you are not dictating the rules of the discussion, go on, make yourself happy.Mion (talk) 20:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC) ^{(Transferred from my talk page. TheFeds)}

Gnewsense

Thanks for the heads up. --Paxcoder (talk) 21:16, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Radwaste

Thank you for the heads up. I have reverted the deletion of text with reliable sources and placed an explanation on the talk page. However, Twerges appears intent on an edit war over this, as he/she/it immediately reverted my reversion before allowing me time to post the discussion on the talk page. I hope you will take a look at it. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 03:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Astris FII (hydrogen golf cart)

The article Astris FII (hydrogen golf cart) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to be an entirely non-notable product. Article contains nothing to indicate otherwise.

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. _wjemather^bigissue 10:45, 24 December 2009 (UTC)