Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Civil engineering

message: I found Neoloy Geocell and Novel polymeric alloy while doing page curation. They look horribly promotional to me and it's hard for me to judge their notability. Expert review is needed! --Slashme (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional articles about PRS Geotechnologies products 

message: * 
Please contribute to the discussion. Uncle G (talk) 15:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  water supply 

message: I have nominated Buffalo Box for deletion.  If you are interested in chiming in, you can find the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buffalo Box --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:10, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD [[Buffalo Box]] 

message: Is there anyone watching here who has knowledge or experience in underwater concrete formwork, mixes and placement? Please ping with reply.· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 16:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Underwater concrete work 

message: The Category Tree should include Bridges and Tunnels.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bridges and Tunnels 

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool 

message: * 
*
Subject to some important structjural engineering technology and studies. See the sources in the article.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:16, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Telegraph Road Bridge]] up for deletion.

message: I am new to the CE project although I have been writing on Wikipedia for over a decade about Civil Engineering. I saw that the project has been inactive for some time and want to work with others on reviving it. I started looking around for best practices in organizing and found the Project Architecture article which is impressive. Then there is Electrical Engineering. Of the two of them, the Architecture has what I would offer is a good template to reorganize the CE project. 
The project scope as currently written talks about topics but not buildings or structures. This is a tough constraint to put on Civil Engineers. In fact, the current categorization has a number of categories that structures. The Electrical engineering project has a good scope statement: 
:"The project generally considers any article related to Electrical engineering to be within its scope.
The Architecture project scope is ...
:"This WikiProject aims to:
::Thoroughly explore architecture, buildings, construction globally and historically.
::Improve articles about architecture, architects, buildings and construction.
::Provide a place to discuss common issues on architecture, buildings, construction related pages.
::Organise and categorise Category:Architecture
::Ensure all pages meet the standards of Wikipedia:Cite sources. See also WikiProject Fact and Reference Check.
::Develop standards and templates for architecture, buildings, construction related articles.
::Manage editing of the Architecture WikiPortal
Taking the best of both projects, this is proposed as a new scope.
:"The WikiProject generally considers any article related to Civil engineering to be within its scope. It also aims to:
::Thoroughly explore civil engineering practice and history, globally and primarily in North America. 
::Improve articles about civil engineering, civil engineers and their projects.
::Provide a place to discuss common issues on civil engineering, civil engineers and their projects related pages.
::Organise and categorise Category:Civil Engineering
::Ensure all pages meet the standards of Wikipedia:Cite sources. See also WikiProject Fact and Reference Check.
::Develop essays, standards and templates for civil engineering, civil engineers and their projects related articles.
Thanks, in advance for your comments. Risk Engineer (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greetings and a new goal for the new year! Change in Scope? Suggestion 

message: There is a requested move at Talk:Rubicon Global that would benefit from your opinion. Please come and help! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 17:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: I asked a question about Planograph on this talk page: Talk:Asphalt_concrete#Looking_for_English_name_of_Planograph. Anyone here who could help? -- Dr. George (T) 19:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Dr. George, I replied at the article talk page - Dumelow (talk) 19:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for English name of ''[[:de:Planograph|Planograph]]'' 

message: The page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch-gravity_dam
contains the sentences
     An arch-gravity dam or arched dam is a dam with the characteristics of both an arch dam and a gravity dam. It is a dam that curves upstream in a narrowing curve that directs most of the water pressure against the canyon rock walls, providing the force to compress the dam. It combines the strengths of two common dam forms and is considered a compromise between the two. 
I think this last sentence would be better to state that the design is an amalgam of the arch & gravity dam designs.
Meaning that it combines the best qualities of both and eliminates the disadvantages.
Calling it a compromise suggests that it still gives up some good qualities and keeps some of the bad.
I could edit it as
     It combines the strengths of two common dam forms and is considered an amalgam between the two
but this doesn't read so well, since it implies a subjective opinion. How about this?
      The design of an arch-gravity dam is an amalgam of the arch dam and gravity dam designs. It is a dam that curves upstream in a narrowing curve that directs most of the water pressure against the canyon rock walls, providing the force to compress the dam. This maximizes the strength of the dam while minimizing the amount of material necessary to construct it.
This sentence here doesn't look accurate:
       However, curving a gravity dam may make it look stronger, but some of this effect may be psychological factors in operation in making a choice of dam style.[6]
I don't know the reference, but the horizontal curved slice really does translate the compression-force of the water along the shape of the curve, which would buckle any other shape.
:Does this editor sign their work?... Risk Engineer (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arch-gravity dam 

message: After years and years of people proposing it basically uncontested on the talk page but it never getting actioned, we've finally added  to . There are 22,000 transclusions, so there's plenty of work for any of you who want to start using it; feel free to pick your favorite buildings and add the information for them. Cheers,  talk 06:07, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Infobox building]] now has a public transit access parameter 

message: The section of the Floodplain article on flood control has been tagged since March 2019 as needing attention from an expert in civil engineering, but I'm not sure this was called out on the civil engineering Wikiproject pages. Inviting your attention to it now. It may just be a matter of verifying the unsourced material already present and adding citations of reliable sources, but perhaps new material is also needed for proper coverage. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Floodplain 

message: Hello,Please note that Trench, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! 
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement! 

message: I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
*John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
* John Smith "" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from ,  and .
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-  Headbomb {t · c · p · b}
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources 

message: Hello,Please note that Soil, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! 
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement! 

message: Hello Civil Engineering WikiProject! I have just completed a major contribution to the Chézy formula page as part of a WikiEdu course. It's an article that was flagged as needing help to improve it from a stub by this WikiProject, so I wanted to update y'all on the progress made. I think it is much improved and the quality scale could be reassessed. I'm still very new to Wikipedia editing, but please feel free to edit or change anything you'd like there. Thanks! Katiejill127 (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chézy formula article update 

message: If you dig a tunnel under a mountain, does it become a mountain pass? I wouldn't think so, but that's how the Paso Internacional Los Libertadores tunnel and border crossing is described. There is a pass nearby, but it has its own article. GA-RT-22 (talk) 15:19, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this particular route may count as a pass, as from either side it is the uppermost section of a long ascent to a high mountain crossing (it would be different if it was a lower-level tunnel under a mountain range). Tunnelled or partially covered sections are common on high mountain routes, often being excavated to avoid extensive, exposed, dangerous, costly or unfeasible alternative routes. In Europe, I have also walked high level routes where 'passes' have included short tunnels that avoid narrow and exposed high ridges. Interesting question though.... Paul W (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is a tunnel under a mountain considered a "pass"? 

message: Hello fellow editors, greetings! I see a need of forming a new article for Geomatics engineering whose scope is increasing and article is yet to be made on wiki. Even Survey engineering can be redirected here. Being a subject of paramount importance and related to this wikiproject I would like to bring it to your kind notice. I would love to assist in the mean process as and when needed but being a civil engineering student I might not be able to accomplish this on my own having been unknown of various terms used. Franked2004 (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a separate article at one time. A merge was proposed and rejected in 2010, then apparently proposed again in 2013 although I can't find the discussion, and it was finally merged in 2016. The current section at Geomatics has very few sources. I suggest working on that first, and doing the split when that section is in better shape. Never mind, I see the decision has already been made. GA-RT-22 (talk) 20:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article creation 

message: Western Wall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Western Wall]] 

message: Example would be HS2, as such will break many records for longest high speed railway bridge in the world. Most employment opportunities for single project in 21st century. A few Guinness W records too Ashattock (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Rail Projects