User talk:Cfrjlr

Hi Charles,

When I said the Project SCORE required expect attention, the page was much less populated, see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Project_SCORE&diff=35505342&oldid=35505311 for the revision where I listed the expert attention required. The page is now up to scratch and I feel it is safe to remove the expert attention tag. Regards Matgraham 04:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles,

The reason I deleted the 76% efficiency bit is that it's not particularly useful for a naive reader. John Kanzius is claiming that his process is a useful energy generation system. It's not. Even if it were running at 100% efficiency, it would not generate energy. It's merely a technique for liberating hydrogen, burning it and creating water again. The efficiency of the system is not central to his claim (and misleads readers into thinking that the efficiency has anything to do with anything). Greglor 13:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Conduction" is where a voltage applied to an electrical conductor produces a current flow. In relation to cardiac pacing the only application of conduction as a means of transfer of energy is between the implanted pacemaker generator and the heart electrodes, via metallic wires. "Induction" was historically used with pacers having a rechargeable battery. In this case the implant contained a coil of wire which could produce a voltage when influenced by a strong external alternating magnetic field. The alternating voltage induced in the coil was changed to non-alternating by means of diodes to provide a direct current inflow to charge the battery. The external "charger" also contained a coil of wire to which was applied an alternating current to produce an alternating magnetic field. By placing the charger closely over the implant there was sufficient interaction between the magnetic field of the charger and the coil of the implant to transfer energy at an efficiency of about 20% -- IOW 20% of the energy radiated by the charger coil was usefully employed, the other 80% lost in space or causing VERY minor heating of tissue. The other and current application of "induction" is where an external programming device is used to send or receive digital data from the implant. The physical principles of inductive coupling are similar to that of battery charging, ie: an alternating magnetic field is provided to induce a (pulsed) voltage at the implant receiver, or from the implant transmitter to the programming device but the objective is to couple information (small energy needed) rather than lots of energy. I hope you find this useful. RegardsGeoffrey Wickham 02:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Solar power satellite do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 02:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from my page:

Please do not remove Spectrolab from the Solar Power Satellite page - it is not an advert. I posted it, and I have no connection with the Spectorlab company. It is valid information to cite that the cells are ocmmercially available. Feel free to add references and citations to other data sheets if you can find them. thank you. Charles 02:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Veinor. There's no need for the external link link, it has nothing to do with the article and appears to be no more than an advert for one of hundreds of solar cell companies.--Bookandcoffee 02:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link is encyclopedically irrelevant and clearly inacceptable, not only per WP:EL but also per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Link titles. Besides, affiliation or not, the phrasing perfectly fits the "such as..." example of WP:SPAM. Femto 14:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Solar power satellite. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. RJASE1 ^Talk 05:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested arbitration on the matter Charles 05:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note: the mediation cabal is not the arbitration committee. The case can be found on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/ solar cell vendor citation. Also, when you open a MEDCAB or other request for a third opinion, it is a very good idea to let all other involved parties know via their talkpages. The only way I know about it is that RJASE1 told me. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 14:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting because I did not even mention RJASE1 in the request. I have never tried using the arbitration system before. It seems very dysfunctional. It appears you will win, not because you are correct, and not because you understand the subject material, but simply because you have a better understanding of the byzantine process. This is unfortunate, but I have learned that is how people generaly achieve politcal power, and keep it.Charles 14:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is Wikipedia political? And MEDCAB, the group you gave the case to, isn't the arbitration committee, which deals only with very large issues. The system is complex, I admit, but people tend to be very forgiving of new users (too forgiving, in some cases). Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 14:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I did leave notes for you and the other fellow on your user pages. I am very busy and do not have time to be very thorough right now. when I get some time I will consult with the Solar Cell community and ask for their opinions on who are the most notable solar cell vendors with regard to efficiency.Charles

I don't see it on mine. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 15:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, reverting content repeatedly is generally considered bad, and redoing the same edit four or more times in one day can get you blocked. More information can be found at WP:3RR. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 14:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is informal mediation still required as requested here? Please let me know. Thanks! Vassyana 13:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, let me say I am sorry you've had such a rough start. There can be a steep learning curve and sometimes new editors do not receive the welcome they sould. While I understand your concern about handles, I obviously do not agree. It makes no differance to me if someone is a Master Engineer or a secondary school electronics student, generally speaking. We should be relying on verifiable information, not credentials. Far too often, people use credentials as a bludgeoning tool in discussions, rather than using that expertise to help non-experts get a handle on the nuances of a topic. I prefer to remain under a psuedonym for a variety of reasons, including my desire for privacy. On the topic of "vicious" people, there's quite a few of us friendly sorts around and many of us are more than willing to mediate disputes and provide advice. I see you've been active at other articles since you filed the mediation request. How has your experience been on those other articles? I also see you have (in the past) expressed some confusion about the policies and guidelines. Is that still a problem for you? Either way, what did you not understand? If you never need any advice or assistance, please do not hesitate to post a message for me on my talk page. Alternatively, you can always post {{helpme}} on your talk page. Be well!!! Vassyana 14:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also a bit belated, but:

Welcome!

Hello, Cfrjlr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Vassyana 14:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

is predicated on inaccurate search terms. I recommend the use of the term 'vaseline', and consideration of the term 'hybrid'.

(What happened was some moron used vaseline (petroleum jelly), when the nitrous valve opened the whole thing promptly blew up...).WolfKeeper 01:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vaseline should not ignite at room temperature when exposed to N2O.Charles 02:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any ignition source will explode it. Notably, before you open the valve the pressure in the pipe leading to the chamber is 1 atmosphere of Nitrogen/oxygen atmosphere. When you open the valve the pressure of the air between the injectors and the tank suddenly goes way up- it's compressed by the ~50 bar (or whatever is in the tank) up to much higher pressures and temperatures- temperatures well above the autoignition temperature of the vaseline. The vaseline then ignites, and you then have the fire triangle, fuel and *plenty* of oxidiser as well as ignition and it all burns very, very well. That then ignites the N2O in monopropellant mode- but on the wrong side of the injectors. Kaboom.... This is called 'dieseling'. Much the same thing happens with LOX btw. WolfKeeper 02:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi W. You mentioned Deiseling, that gives me a clue. It sounds like somehow a high pressure condition occurred which increased the temperature to above the 300 C ignition zone. Does that sound right ? Charles 03:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Adiabatic compression of air to ~50 bar. It's easy to show that the adiabatic temperature of the air is then about 690C. Ignition temperature of vaseline is 290C. Boom.WolfKeeper 03:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Below 300 C, N2O is essentially non-reactive. I would like to see a more detailed accident report, can you provide a reference? Thanks.Charles 02:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're amateurs. I doubt there would have been, but you may be able to find a report somewhere. Dieseling is a fairly well known problem with oxidisers though.WolfKeeper 02:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -

I translated the Hans Ziegler article from the German Wiki. It has not been proofread yet, but I don't know when that will happen. Enjoy! Scbarry (talk) 05:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for cleaning up my <ref> tag on the Tardigrade article, I was never really sure what the format was. 24.68.42.1 (talk) 01:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To improve the article:

1) Wiki needs to view it as science.

2) Wiki needs to recognize which scientific journals are utilized and sourced by scientists in this field of physics.

I predict a tremendous increase in the readability of the article.

Query to the scientific community: To the Directors of Physics Departments,

LENR - Low Energy Nuclear Reaction and Widom Larson Theory, aka Condensed Matter Nuclear or Lattice Enabled Nuclear; historically misnamed "Cold Fusion"

1) Is this science or pathological science?

2) Do you offer a class in this discipline? If so, please provide information.

3) Are you developing a curriculum of this science? If so, when will you offer it?

4) What peer review journals do you utilize or source in this field?

Charles sir, P>S> 1) Any suggestions or criticisms before I move forward with this? 2) Is this direction of query able to yield opinions the Wikipedia forum on Cold Fusion may value? Thank you for your time, Gregory Goble gbgoble@gmail.com (415) 724-6702--Gregory Goble (talk) 01:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Robbie Dale has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Elongated shorty (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Christopher Moore (DJ) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable radio presenter.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Elongated shorty (talk) 00:28, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edgar Bolden is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edgar Bolden until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 06:10, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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