Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Engineering/Archive 1

message: ===Userbox===
I have created a basic template for a userbox at User:Tbo 157/WikiProject Engineering/Userbox.  Please feel free to experiment with it.  You are also very welcome to create other templates for the projects such as talk page banners and also project pages such as an assessment page which will be useful for the project when it is fully up and running.  Thanks.  Tbo 157talk 16:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the userbox could use a better image than those gears (maybe a picture of an engineering marvel like the Burj Dubai). Hydrogen Iodide 17:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was just a basic template so please feel free to change it in any way you want.  I agree that the image should be better. Tbo 157talk 17:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, changed the image. Any comments? Hydrogen Iodide 18:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure about the current image. The gears are widely used to represent engineering, and the Burj Dubai image is a little hard to see at such a small size. This is off-topic, but as for project shortcuts, WP:ENGIN, WP:ENGINE, WP:ENGR and the obvious WP:ENGINEERING are not taken. Raime 19:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: There is already a project for Civil Engineering so it is probably a good idea to distinguish this project from that one by focusing this project on engineering as a whole. The current image for the userbox does suggest civil engineering. Tbo 157talk 20:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I reverted back to the orginial image. Any ideas for another image? Hydrogen Iodide 20:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally like the gears. The image describes engineering as a whole. Plus, very simple images are usually used in infoboxes. Raime 20:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the gear image as well, but I just think it might be a little repetitive to have the gear-image appear everywhere on this WikiProject, so that's why I suggested another image for the userbox. Hydrogen Iodide 20:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you're saying. I personally think that one image throughout is good, as it can always easily be indentified with a topic. Raime 22:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Most talk page banners are very similar.  We should have our own assessment page and insert a link to it in the banner.  But what kind of image should we use? Tbo 157talk 20:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say, for now, use the gear image. However, if there is a better engineering image, then replace it. Hydrogen Iodide 20:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that. Sticking with the gear image is good, at least for now; it can be one image that is easily identifiable with this project. The question is, do we include an importance rating as well as an assessment rating? Some projects only have the assessment rating, and some don't even have that. But I'd say include both. Raime 22:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I'd say we include the importance template. However, one note, I think the WP:HK project had problems with the importance rating and so they quit with importance assessing. Hydrogen Iodide 22:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: How's that? I included the importance assessment, but it can easily be removed. Raime 23:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. However, I would add the redirect and template ratings into the code. Hydrogen Iodide 23:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to copy the code to  when the mock template is complete. Hydrogen Iodide 23:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to adjust the code in any way you see fit. I tried to base it almost entirely on the Architecture template, but any improvements would be great. Do you think it is a little premature to copy it onto its own page? It might get nominated for deletion as a template not used in any articles and not involved in a WikiProject that has moved beyond the proposal stage. Raime 23:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess now would be an appropriate time to move the code into a real template, since this is a real project now. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 17:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer to use This article is within the scope of, as many other wikiprojects do. Sometimes we don't want to absolutely claim an article but we want to declare an interest. I'd be much more comfortable tagging articles' talk pages with that. --Athol Mullen 05:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

text: It definitely needs an image (the gear one would be fine). We could also customize it with different sizing and coloring. But I personally think it is fine to use the usual message template. Rai-me 02:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Templates and project pages 

message: I have created a basic template for a userbox at User:Tbo 157/WikiProject Engineering/Userbox.  Please feel free to experiment with it.  You are also very welcome to create other templates for the projects such as talk page banners and also project pages such as an assessment page which will be useful for the project when it is fully up and running.  Thanks.  Tbo 157talk 16:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the userbox could use a better image than those gears (maybe a picture of an engineering marvel like the Burj Dubai). Hydrogen Iodide 17:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was just a basic template so please feel free to change it in any way you want.  I agree that the image should be better. Tbo 157talk 17:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, changed the image. Any comments? Hydrogen Iodide 18:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure about the current image. The gears are widely used to represent engineering, and the Burj Dubai image is a little hard to see at such a small size. This is off-topic, but as for project shortcuts, WP:ENGIN, WP:ENGINE, WP:ENGR and the obvious WP:ENGINEERING are not taken. Raime 19:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: There is already a project for Civil Engineering so it is probably a good idea to distinguish this project from that one by focusing this project on engineering as a whole. The current image for the userbox does suggest civil engineering. Tbo 157talk 20:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I reverted back to the orginial image. Any ideas for another image? Hydrogen Iodide 20:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally like the gears. The image describes engineering as a whole. Plus, very simple images are usually used in infoboxes. Raime 20:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the gear image as well, but I just think it might be a little repetitive to have the gear-image appear everywhere on this WikiProject, so that's why I suggested another image for the userbox. Hydrogen Iodide 20:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you're saying. I personally think that one image throughout is good, as it can always easily be indentified with a topic. Raime 22:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox

message: Any ideas on how the engineering project notice template should look like? Personally, I think it should be pretty similiar to the existing notices for the other WikiProjects. Hydrogen Iodide 20:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most talk page banners are very similar.  We should have our own assessment page and insert a link to it in the banner.  But what kind of image should we use? Tbo 157talk 20:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say, for now, use the gear image. However, if there is a better engineering image, then replace it. Hydrogen Iodide 20:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that. Sticking with the gear image is good, at least for now; it can be one image that is easily identifiable with this project. The question is, do we include an importance rating as well as an assessment rating? Some projects only have the assessment rating, and some don't even have that. But I'd say include both. Raime 22:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I'd say we include the importance template. However, one note, I think the WP:HK project had problems with the importance rating and so they quit with importance assessing. Hydrogen Iodide 22:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: How's that? I included the importance assessment, but it can easily be removed. Raime 23:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. However, I would add the redirect and template ratings into the code. Hydrogen Iodide 23:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to copy the code to  when the mock template is complete. Hydrogen Iodide 23:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to adjust the code in any way you see fit. I tried to base it almost entirely on the Architecture template, but any improvements would be great. Do you think it is a little premature to copy it onto its own page? It might get nominated for deletion as a template not used in any articles and not involved in a WikiProject that has moved beyond the proposal stage. Raime 23:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess now would be an appropriate time to move the code into a real template, since this is a real project now. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 17:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer to use This article is within the scope of, as many other wikiprojects do. Sometimes we don't want to absolutely claim an article but we want to declare an interest. I'd be much more comfortable tagging articles' talk pages with that. --Athol Mullen 05:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Project notice template

message: Any ideas on how this template should look like? I think we will still go with the gear-image. H - I acid  (HI!) 01:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It definitely needs an image (the gear one would be fine). We could also customize it with different sizing and coloring. But I personally think it is fine to use the usual message template. Rai-me 02:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Invitation template

message: Even though it's probably a bit early, it would be helpful to have a WikiProject infobox on the upper-right hand corner. It should look something like this:
----
----
Hydrogen Iodide 19:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. We could also use a Navbox instead. Raime 19:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  The infobox and navbox could be one template. Tbo 157talk 20:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We would only need one. But which one? Also, I think we should create a small "shortcut" box, which seems to be pretty standard in WikiProjects. Raime 22:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox WikiProject 

message: In order for this project to become a real WikiProject, we need a lot more new members. However, when I announced this project in the WikiProject Architecture talk page, there didn't seem to be a lot of support. In addition, the formal WikiProject proposal didn't get a lot of interested members as well. Shall we wait for more members to join or go around and post an invitation on their usertalk pages? Hydrogen Iodide 23:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put a proposal on the Portal:Engineering page, but I doubt that will come to much if the above listed did so little. But I think we actually can become a real WikiProject right now. 5 users on this page, with another 4 on the formal proposal page, seems to me to be enough to go ahead and create the project; some existing projects have less participants. Invitations would be a good idea, though. We could create a message template. Raime 01:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I will go notify Tbo 157 about the move to a real WikiProject. H - I acid  (HI!) 01:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. 9 members is plenty. We already beat WikiProject Rhode Island. :) Raime 01:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Created a mock template in the first section of this page. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 01:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

text: So, are we ready to invite people? It seems like the invitation and welcome templates are complete. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 19:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's get to it. Rai-me 19:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a little off-topic, but again, what do we do about the Civil Engineering project? Are we leaving the already tagged articles (with the exception of the main Civil engineering one) to that project only, or is each civil engineering article going to be also a part of this one? Rai-me 01:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Do you think we should also ask members of the Civil Engineering Wikiproject to join as well? Huang7776 23:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already placed a notice on their talk page but there doesn't seem to be much interest for the project there.  We could ask them if they would like to become a child project so that the 2 projects can work together. Tbo 157talk 15:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I just realised that WikiProject Civil Engineering already does consider this project as a parent project.Tbo 157talk 16:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inviting new members 

message: With a mock template in place, I think we should start inviting people by going over to the Engineering article, then search for major contributors to the Engineering article and post the invitation template on the user talk page. Sound good? Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 04:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So, are we ready to invite people? It seems like the invitation and welcome templates are complete. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 19:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's get to it. Rai-me 19:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a little off-topic, but again, what do we do about the Civil Engineering project? Are we leaving the already tagged articles (with the exception of the main Civil engineering one) to that project only, or is each civil engineering article going to be also a part of this one? Rai-me 01:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Do you think we should also ask members of the Civil Engineering Wikiproject to join as well? Huang7776 23:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already placed a notice on their talk page but there doesn't seem to be much interest for the project there.  We could ask them if they would like to become a child project so that the 2 projects can work together. Tbo 157talk 15:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I just realised that WikiProject Civil Engineering already does consider this project as a parent project.Tbo 157talk 16:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Invitation method

message: Thanks for your input and contributions to the setting up of this WikiProject.  I have now moved the page to the wikipedia space.  I will work on project pages,templates and all are welcome to help.  We also do need more members so that the project won't become inactive.  Tbo 157talk 16:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I will make all of the quality and importance rating categories. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 18:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved to Wikipedia space 

message: I have added a navigation template on the front page which we can experiment with.  Thanks. Tbo 157talk 17:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, I think there is an error with the navigation template. When I click on edit, it takes me to the trains navigation template, not the engineering one. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 17:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixed it so it should work now. Tbo 157talk 17:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why exactly is this needed? Is it standard for WikiProjects? All information seems to be well-covered by the new infobox. Rai-me 19:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I guess this will help new members navigate through the WikiProject Engineering pages. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 19:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most wikiprojects have navigation templates instead of infoboxes but if you don't like the navigation template, it can be changed or removed.  I just thought it would be helpful. Tbo 157talk 19:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is fine. I didn't realize it was standard. Do you think we should remove the infobox and merge its information into the navbox, though? Having both seems slightly odd. Rai-me 19:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see an infobox on the main page. Tbo 157talk 19:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I meant the navbar and the navbox. Do we really need both? (I was referring to the navbox as the "infobox" and the navbar as the "navbox". My mistake.) Rai-me 19:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh right.  The navbar is used to navigate around the project from any project page including the portal while the navbox is only used on the main page. Tbo 157talk 16:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navigation template 

message: Is this really necessary? I personally find it easier to have all templates organized in one table on the project page. Rai-me 19:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess this is for organizational reasons. I am okay about it. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 19:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For example, see the table on WikiProject Massachusetts. I think this is a good way to organize and clearly present all templates, rather than use a separate page. Rai-me 19:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is for organisational reasons.  I have found from other projects that inserting templates on the main page can get chaotic after a while as more templates are created. Tbo 157talk 19:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there really that good of a chance that very many templates will accumulate for this particlular project? Mostly geographic locations are the ones that need that. Rai-me 19:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Im not sure.  We'll see. Tbo 157talk 19:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We could transclude the sub-page for now, and change to just having a link if it gets too unwieldy... --Athol Mullen 05:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Page 

message: I have created a welcome template for new members.  Please feel free to experiment.  Regarding the portal, I have updated the relevant areas.  When there are enough participants, we may be able to begin monthly voting for the selected article and image of the portal.  Thanks. Tbo 157talk 19:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welcome template and portal 

message: Should we keep WikiProject Engineering on the WikiProject proposals page? I'm thinking of removing the Engineering proposal since the project has been created, obviously. However, I still would like to have more members in the project, so leaving the proposal there may help. Any suggestions? Compromises? Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 18:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#After creation, I think we should remove it. We will probably earn far more members through invitations than by leaving it on the proposal page. Rai-me 19:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Keep or remove it from the WikiProject Proposal page 

message: Is there a specified location we should be placing the Engineering portal tag? On the engineering article, it is placed in the intro, which I definitely think is not a good idea. I actually think that since it is on the Project Banner, we really don't need to place the portal tag anywhere on the article pages. But, if we were to leave the actual articles tagged, the tag should probably be placed in the See also or External links sections. Rai-me 19:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal tag Placement 

message: Does anybody think this project needs its own peer review department? Anyway, I modified the project banner template to accomodate peer-review requests. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 21:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure that we really need one at this point. It is still such a small project. Maybe in the future, since it is a very good idea. Rai-me 22:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Raime.  The project doesn't have enough participants at the moment to start such activities. Tbo 157talk 15:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about when the project has around 20 members? Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 16:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When we get around 20 or more active members, then we should be able to start activities such as peer review and portal voting.Tbo 157talk 16:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engineering peer review department 

message: Parent might be Wikipedia:WikiProject Technology. ZueJay (talk) 01:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would definitely agree with this, since the Engineering Portal is considered to be a subdivision of the Technology Portal. Rai-me 02:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added WikiProject Technology under parent WikiProject section. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 03:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related Wikiprojs 

message: I have added this project to Template:Announcements/Community bulletin board and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Science.  For gaining more members, do you think we should add an advertisement to the user page advertising banners as quite alot of users have these on their user page. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 18:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that that would be a great idea. Rai-me 22:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 02:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. Does anyone have any specific ideas for the advertisement banner. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 00:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe something that displays a picture of an engineering marvel??? Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 02:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I really thing we should stick with either the gears, the calculator/sine graph, or the paper/pencil image. Those images are already being used/are going to be used to deacribe the prject, and having a small amount images that can be related to this particular project seems like a good idea. Rai-me 12:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe we should base our ad on WP:HK's.
----
----
Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 05:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.  I think our ad can comprise of all the images mentioned above.  I'll mock up a template ad that we can work on later on. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 18:56, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What color should the background be? Dark blue? Rai-me 19:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

text: The ad banners are quite difficult to create as I am not experienced with graphical software and so I have asked User:Miranda, who is an experienced ad banner creator, if the user can create an ad for us.    I have not had a reply yet and I am unlikely to get one until after October 10 as the user is currently taking a wikibreak.  Thanks. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 17:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

text: First, I would appreciate the person who is initiating the "banner" venue to go through WP:BANNER, because I am not making ads at the current period, and have expressed that numerous amounts of times.  Second, I also would have loved for the person who "desired the ad" to express some sort of gratitude to me for making the ad at the last minute. The main reason that I "hate" making these ads is due to them taking a LOT OF TIME out of my schedule to do this for a project. Third, I will make NO changes to this banner. If you hate it, then you have to figure out how make a replacement, yourselves. Miranda 04:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I think Miranda has done a good job with the banner and I would like to thank the user again on behalf of the project.  This will probably attract more members. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 19:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaining more members 

message: It seems like this page is getting too long. Maybe it's time to archive some of the other threads. Any comments? Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 07:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest miszabot. Initially, set it to 14 days to clear the large glut of activity that occurred when the project got started, then once it has archived once, change it to 30 days and leave it at that unless the activity level picks up significantly. If there is consensus, I'm happy to set it up. --Athol Mullen 09:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good. I think I might start the archive page later. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 17:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ye, we can use miszabot. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 18:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a very good idea. Rai-me 19:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Set to 14 days, and not a moment too soon. "This page is 38 kilobytes long." --Athol Mullen 10:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving threads 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion: Foundation anchor 

message: I just ran across the subject heading in Archive 1.  I already added or moved a couple of links to WikiProject Engineering on few engineer/engineering pages before I read the discussion.  I noticed a discrepancy in how they were used (or not) and placement.  Based on my research, there's not yet a standard for placement of portal links.  I thought at top looked okay for most pages, but stopped adding/moving when I saw they interfered with photos at the top right-hand corner.  I suggest you poll all other engineering project leaders/pages to see if everyone can agree on a standard approach for engineer/engineering, then put a note on Wikipedia_talk:Portal summarizing the agreement.--CheMechanical 02:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From my experiences, Portal tags they are almost always placed on project banners on talk pages (which is already practiced in this case) and/or next to "External links" or "See also". Putting them at the top of the article seems very strange to me. I personally don't think this is really a big issue, as the link is provided on the talk page. However, if I had to pick one, I would probably vote for placement in the "See also" sections. I agree; a final vote would be the best idea. Rai-me 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Portal tags are normally placed on the project banner on the talk page and also on the top right hand corner of relevaant articles such as Engineering which already has the portal tag. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 12:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From the WikiProjects I have seen, such as WP:PHILLY, WP:DALLAS and WP:TEXAS, the tags are placed next to the external links or see also setions. Placement at the top of the article looks rather strange, and interferes with images and infoboxes. How common is this practice among WikiProjects? Rai-me 13:01, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinking about it, I have seen both before but I agree with you that it is a better idea to place the tag in the see also section so that it does not interfere with images and infoboxes. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 17:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also typically see them in the Ext. Links or See Also sections. Closer to the top may be appropriate for main topics (specific disciplines such as electrical, chemical, etc.) but not for every article (i.e. Engineers or subjects which may be associated in some way with multiple projects/portals). Just my opinion and personal experience of course, not sure there's an over reaching guideline. Stardust8212 01:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal tag Placement (continued) 

message: We just busted a long-term WP:COI spamming campaign that involved the pushing of pseudoscientific materials via use of sockpuppetry. The party responsible was a member of this wikiproject. See WP:ANI#User:Sadi_Carnot for more information (permanent link). Please check through this editor's contributions, as well as the sockpuppet's and fix  any of the damage he may have caused. Thanks. MER-C 06:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pseudoscience spamming 

message: Page(s) related to this project have been created and/or added to one of the Wikipedia:Contents subpages (not by me).
*List of basic engineering topics
*List of basic machine topics
This note is to let you know, so that experts in the field can expand them and check them for accuracy, and so that they can be added to any watchlists/tasklists, and have any appropriate project banners added, etc. Thanks. --Quiddity 20:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice of List articles 

message: Just a note to all WikiProject Engineering members that you can now nominate or vote for the Engineering Portal's selected aricle and image of the month at Portal:Engineering/Selected article and image nominations.  Any members can nominate any article and image and any members can vote for nominated images and articles.  It only takes a minute and is useful so that the Portal's selected article and image can be changed each month.  This means more users can look at it and more users can edit it. Tbo 157(talk) 00:59, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Engineering/Selected article and image nominations]] 

message: It's been over a month now since the project was moved to Wiki space. However, the main page seems unfinished to me. We seem to have enough members and so perhaps we could add and expand the main project page. Any ideas or comments for the main page? Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 22:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We could start featured article and image voting for the portal.  I can't think of much else to add to the main page but we could start setting goals, for example getting the main articles in the scope of this project to featured article status. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 00:01, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that those are great ideas. We could start a collaboration of the week to help bring the aforementioned articles to Featured or Good status. On another note, I still think that we should merge the template page into the main project page, as there are not enough templates to really warrant an individual page, at least not at this point. Rai-me 00:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: How about a resource section, a section to report issues (vandalism), categories section, assessment, and history sections in addition to a voting section. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 00:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure if the project cuurently covers enough articles to need all of those things, but they are very good ideas. Have there been any vandalism problems on any of the main pages, and is there really a strong need to set up an assessment process? For the most part, these seem to be reserved for only the very large WikiProjects that cover wide expanses of articles, which this project does not (at least for the moment) do. Rai-me 00:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the engineering page should be based on WP:VOLCANO's main project page. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 00:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you mean to set up an assessment section similar to that of the Volcano Project, then I think that would be a good idea. I was thinking you meant something more along the lines of WP:BIOGRAPHY. Rai-me 00:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good ideas. However I don't think the project needs a vandalism section at this time. Tbo 157(talk) (review) 12:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We could have a section on the main page where we set our current goals such as getting an article to featured status and we could have separate pages for portal selected image/article voting and collaborations.  Does anyone have any other ideas or disagree with what I said?  Tbo 157(talk) (review) 11:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have started a page where we can nominate and vote for the selected image and picture of the month on the portal.  I have also placed a link to the page on the portal.  Regarding the main page, does anyone have any more ideas, other than setting goals, as both collaboration and selected article votings are something done on separate pages in most WikiProjects.  Thanks. Tbo 157(talk) 00:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: It looks great.  Sorry Ive neglected this WikiProject for a bit as I have been quite busy for the last few week. Tbo 157(talk) 00:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm not done yet. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide  (HI!) 01:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok.  Ill be happy to help you with anything. Tbo 157(talk) 16:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks.  ILl try and help when I can. Tbo 157(talk) 19:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main project page expansion 

message: IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science is being debated as being a fringe journal in relation to the article tired light. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 22:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 

message: Hello. I have been asked by the engineering firm I work for, Sinclair Knight Merz, to start a page on the company. SKM is already mentioned in a number of articles currently on Wikipedia (by persons unknown to me) so it seemed time that the page was written so the other articles could be properly linked.
Given the COI I at first discussed this on the [Help Desk] of November 27 2007. I seemed to get reasonable support there that the article I had written was neutral but was told adding some third party citations would be best. This I have now done.
I was wondering if members of this project would be interested in taking a look at the article I have mocked up on my Talk page and providing comment. Ultimately I would be also looking for someone to decide the page was NPOV enough and publish it for me, to avoid the knee-jerk COI deletion. I would be more than pleased to disclose my COI on the resulting article talk page. (I hope my routing this through first the help Desk and then here rather than just creating the article in mainpsace is also proof of my good intentions to avoid COI.) --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with Engineering company article 

message: Almost all modern engineering is done on computer using a variety of different software.  The strengths, incompatibilities and weaknesses in this software can be hugely responsible for what goes on today.  If you don't believe me, see the Airbus/Catia debacle of 2006.
Anyways, this is just an invitation for people to take notice.  It should be a whole sub-wikiproject of its own, but this topic is so deeply overlooked that I hope people don't mind if I add it in here.  I know a good amount of what's going on in my little area (computer-aided manufacture -- which software comes from where and how it's designed), but have to struggle to find citations.  This information, while crucial to the understanding of the software, is rarely disclosed when it matters,  and is usually forgotten about when it no longer has commercial value (which doesn't mean it still matters to us).  In fact, crucial information and history of the software which is at the heart of hours of our working lives is incredibly sparse.  People are not in the habit of asking the right questions and talking about it.Goatchurch (talk) 09:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to add it to this project. Tbo 157(talk) 17:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CAD/CAM software 

message: Dear Wikimedians,
This is a (belated) announcement that requests are now being taken for illustrations to be created for the Philip Greenspun illustration project (PGIP).
The aim of the project is to create and improve illustrations on Wikimedia projects. You can help by identifying which important articles or concepts are missing illustrations (diagrams) that could make them a lot easier to understand. Requests should be made on this page: Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project/Requests
If there's a topic area you know a lot about or are involved with as a Wikiproject, why not conduct a review to see which illustrations are missing and needed for that topic? Existing content can be checked by using Mayflower to search Wikimedia Commons, or use the Free Image Search Tool to quickly check for images of a given topic in other-language projects.
The community suggestions will be used to shape the final list, which will be finalised to 50 specific requests for Round 1, due to start in January. People will be able to make suggestions for the duration of the project, not just in the lead-up to Round 1.
* General information about the project: m:Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project
* Potential illustrators and others interested in the project should join the mailing list: mail:greenspun-illustrations
thanks, pfctdayelise (talk) 13:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[m:GIP|Greenspun illustration project]]: requests now open 

message: :This notification has been placed here as the article would appear to fall within the scope of this WikiProject ... albeit, barely.
:: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article for deletion: Songa Mercur 

message: Just posting notification of a somewhat relevant RfC:
Talk:Kilometres per hour#RfC: Should titles of article on units of the form "X per Y" be singular or plural?.
Oli Filth(talk) 23:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice of somewhat relevant RfC 

message: Look at this discussion and give your opinion, please: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Process_engineering --Aushulz (talk) 01:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons categories 

message: Hi, there. I am an machine engineer and contributed to translate above mentioned article from hr.wiki (where I am admin) to English language. Now somebody is saying that article is not good enuough for wikipedia, I do not know where these claims are coming from. Can anybody competent (with technical knowledge) check the article and give his opinion about should it be deleted or not. Regards --Lasta 06:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[NSC-engine]] 

message: Can someone answer my question at Talk:Passivity (engineering)?  Thank you. Michael Hardy (talk) 12:44, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone explain this? 

message: I am a bit surprised, there is no article relating geodetic engineering here. In the Philippines, there is an undergraduate (and graduate) degree program called geodetic engineering. It precisely deals with the science of earth measurements (as in plane and geodetic, astronomic, etc. surveying), to digital and manual cartography, remote sensing, GPS and GIS systems, photogrammetry, etc. If there is no really geodetic engineering in other countries, what is the nearest engineering discipline that comes in after geodetic engineering? I am asking this because I have difficulties on where to link  geodetic engineering. Thanks.--JL 09Talk to me! 14:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geodetic engineering 

message: There is a naming dispute considering the correct name for the category for the main article Markov chain and related articles, see WP:CFD. 76.66.192.144 (talk) 03:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Markov chains]] and [[:Category:Markov models]] 

message: I've started a page on the Scottish engineer James Howden who invented the Howden System of Forced Draught in the 1880s. As I have no engineering knowledge whatsoever it would be good if someone who does could look at this and explain what this system is and its significance in the greater engineering scheme of things. Thanks, Ericoides (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  James Howden 

message: I have requested a list of popular pages for this project at . --Ysangkok (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular pages 

message: This is regarding the common content in the articles Electromagnetic clutch and Electromagnetic brake.
I propose that the articles Electromagnetic clutch and Electromagnetic brake should have general and concise info, and links to another article, which contains the theoretical treatment.
I tried to do this by creating this_revision, and moving the theoretical part (which is actually good and useful) to the article Friction-plate electromagnetic clutch. Similarly, this this_revision could be used for the Electromagnetic brake article.
However, the user User:Oguraclutch repeatedly adds the content back to these two pages, and does not heed warnings on the user's Talk page. Although Oguraclutch's contributions are good, the user is persistent on keeping only it's own contributions in these articles, evidently with the motive of promoting (presumably) its own website, www.ogura-clutch.com, to which it has placed several links in both these articles.
Could someone please help? Maybe we need to lock these articles from being edited to prevent this vandalism?
The Discoverer (talk) 14:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The user has been banned for promoting his website. Wizard191 (talk) 16:48, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clutches and brakes working on electromagnetic principle