User talk:Milton Beychok: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Milton Beychok
imported>Milton Beychok
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Archive box|auto=long}}
{{Usertime-text|Milt}}{{Template:Utc|-7}}<br><BR><BR><br>
== I just archived the last batch of postings ==
That is why this page looks rather empty at this moment. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 18:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
== an article of interest (maybe) ==
Would [http://www.microbialcellfactories.com/content/4/1/24 this article] be useful to you for any of the subjects you've been working on around here?  It is licensed under a Creative Commons attribution license, which means that its contents may be reused as long as credit is given.  I assume that goes for the photos and diagrams too, which might be of some use. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 14:18, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
:Joe, that article would indeed be a good one for CZ and would work for inclusion in the Engineering and/or  the Biology Workroups as well as the Chemical Engineering subgroup. However, it is a part of Chemical Engineering and/or Biochemical Engineering (see [[Chemical engineering]]) in which I have no no expertise or experience. I would be reluctant to just copy an article in a field I know practically nothing about.
:Perhaps someone in the Biology Workgroup (like Chris Day, who is a Biology Editor) would be qualified to work on that article? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
== Cryptography ==
Thank you for becoming an approving editor on [[brute force attack]]. There's been discussion and some change to the article since it was proposed. Please have a look, see if you can still support.
There's a [[User_talk:Howard_C._Berkowitz#Approvals.3F | long list]] of crypto articles that I think are near approval. One thing I'd really like is for someone who isn't in the field to look through [[Block_cipher#Principles_and_techniques]] and see if it makes sense. I think it should, but I don't really know. Would you have time for that? [[User:Sandy Harris|Sandy Harris]] 08:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
:Yes, I stiil support the nomination. See my comment on the article's talk page. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 14:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
==Thanks==
Hi Milt. Thanks for the response you posted on Larry's talk page. [[User:Hendra I. Nurdin|Hendra I. Nurdin]] 05:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
==Chemical Corps==
Sure. I think I created it at a time when someone was on a lower case rampage and I was tired of the changing. As the Brits say, capital idea.
Interesting thought: is that, as well as the chemical weapon/warfare material, appropriate to come under chemical engineering? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 22:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
:I have renamed it to Chemical Corps. As for it coming under the Chemical Engineering Subgroup, I think that is borderline okay for this one article. Maybe also borderline okay for the Chemistry Workgroup. In general, I  think it and all related articles should be kept under the Military Workgroup. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 01:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
== Timing ==
Milton your clock is two hours behind. It seems that the CZ timing went completely crazy, I tried to edit the talk page of vapor pressure and it seems to have done somewhere in the past with the net effect that my edits are lost.--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 17:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
== Approval ==
Hi Milton, I approved all three now. I considered the process smooth sailing, I hope you did too. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 23:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
:It was smooth sailing indeed! Thanks very much. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 23:35, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
:Hi Milt, I made a few changes to [[Specific heat ratio]]. Please take a look. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
== Vapor pressure approved, April 14th -- Congratulations ==
Hi, Milton, the [[Vapor pressure]] article has been approved and protected! Congrats! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 04:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
== Relative volatility approved, April 15th, Congratulations! ==
Hi, Milt, your article has been Approved -- you can see it at [[Relative volatility]]. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
== adding a null space ==
Hmmm, I see that I guess I have to add the null space to the Draft version of the article in question rather than to the Waiting for Approvals page, which is where I tried doing it. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
== Congratulations again! ==
I've just Approved the [[Specific heat ratio]] article. But this time I'm not gonna waste any of my time trying to "jog" the flippin' Metadata -- let someone else do it, hehe! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 18:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
== Thank you for  unveiling the engineer's mind. ==
Smart nerds, those engineers, thank you for sharing this with me. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 23:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
== Gasoline nominated for approval ==
Milton, I nominated '''Gasoline''' for approval.  Thanks for the rewording of the stability section. [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 17:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
== pillars ==
[[Image:Mining2.gif|thumb|right|Updated figure showing pillars in an old vs modern mine]]
Milt, did you notice I upgraded the hand drawing.  If it is still the old one empty your cache and then look at it. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 16:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
:If it is useful and you want some modifcations i can make changes for you. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 16:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
::Chris, I replaced the hand-drawn sketches with a much better diagram from the Kentucky Geological Survey (KGS). At the time that I did that, the old hand-drawn sketchs were still in the article. I did not realize that you had updated the sketches until you just notified me. In fact, the History page of the article still shows the old sketchs.
::In any event, I think that the KGS diagram is probably all we need for that article. Thanks, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
:::No problem, i like the one you added.  Note, I only upgraded the pillar one.  i did not do the drift vs open vs shaft mining figure. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 17:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
== Malt, Milton, and God ==
Milton, truly, Housman had it right, "Malt does more than Milton can to justify God's ways to man." But he also wrote, "Ale, man, ale's the stuff to drink for fellows whom it hurts to think."
If you quote Housman, don´t you think you should write a CZ article on him?  Even if it hurts to think. WP has one. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 02:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
:Anthony, I didn't make that quote ... it was Hayford Pierce. I was just an innocent bystander who happened to be named Milton. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 02:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
::That happens to be my favorite poem. About the only one in the world, I guess, aside from other Housman poems, that I can understand.  And that rhyme.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
== Do you know the new guy? ==
[[User:Richard_C_Mason]] <br>It seems like there would be a lot of overlap with what you two would be interested in working on. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 04:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
:Yes, I read his bio and I hope that he will be active. I'll keep my fingers crossed. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 05:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
::Maybe you could invite him to contribute to an article you've worked on.  Personal contact from peers or others with similar interests always seems best for encouraging new people to become active contributors. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 20:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
:::Joe, have a look at his Talk page where I have done what you suggested. What do you think? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 01:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
::::Looks good to me.  Who knows whether we'll ever hear from him again but I'd say we've done what we can to encourage him.  I replied to your post on my talk page there -- I've run into roadblocks with addressing the licensing stuff a couple of times.  Please keep reminding me and I'll try to find time to figure it out. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 01:47, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
== [[Gasoline]] article approved ==
Congrats, Milton, the [[Gasoline]] article is now, God willing, Approved by yours truly! It even has a bar across the Talk screen that other Approved articles apparently don't have.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 20:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
== Drafts ==
Well done, Milton! I gotta say that I wuz gettin' awful frickin' tired of seein' those same two things there for what seems to me to have been *months* on end.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks, Hayford. The instructions said the updating should be done by a "program administrator". I don't know who they are, but I apologise to them if I offended them by doing it this time. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 03:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
::Well, I *know* -- I read that too! And I thought at the time that there was a particular one person in charge of it. Otherwise I would have make a change myself of some sort three weeks ago! Yet another CZ thingee where, I fear, it is '''Not Clear on the Concept'''.... Or perhaps on the execution.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
== Nomination ==
Hi Milton, I shall withdraw my vote as requested. [[User:Meg Ireland|Meg Ireland]] 02:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
== Oops... ==
Sorry, misplaced vote, I should have paid attention to under which category I was signing. [[User:Yi Zhe Wu|Yi Zhe Wu]] 04:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
== "Ethyl" Anecdotes ==
Hi Milton,
It seems that in your work on the [[Lead]] and [[Tetraethyl lead]] articles, some of the little anecdotal stories about Kettering and the material's manufacture at the Ethyl Corp. seem to have been eliminated.  I kind of liked those, and it leaves me to wonder: do you feel that they were not accurate? --[[User:David Yamakuchi|David Yamakuchi]] 14:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
:Hi, David. If you will read the dicussion pages of both the [[Lead]] and the [[Tetraethyl lead]] (TEL) articles, you will see that:
:* I  first expressed my opinion that the TEL history section ("Lead as a fuel additive") of the [[Lead]] article was was much too long , about 35-40% of the article. After all, that article was about the element Lead ... not about the liquid compound TEL. I proposed shortening that section a great deal and creating a separate, stand-alone article about TEL. Chris Day, Joe Quick and Ro Thorpe all agreed and told me to go ahead ... so I did.
:* When I created the new, stand-alone TEL article I included a sub-section header for History (with two excellent references to online articles about Midgley, Kettering and the early history of TEL). Then in the Talk page of the TEL article, I noted that more work was need on the TEL article and I hoped that someone knowlegeable about TEL would work on it. If nobody steps forth to review the article and write that History section in the next few weeks, then I will try my hand at it.
:I just felt that I had done enough and that someone else could add the finishing touches. However, I do feel that the TEL history section should be more concise and shorter than the section that was once in the Lead article.
:Would you like to try writing that History section of the new, stand-alone TEL article? Please feel free to do so. Regards, [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
== Re Stanneken's paper on NO synthases ==
Milton, I had emailed Stanneken about getting permissions for the drawings, but have not heard back from. I'll contact him again. Thanks for the nudge. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 03:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Milton, Stan appears not to have read the rules about images, or understand the issue.  I put it to him pointedly, and cc'd you by email. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 21:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
== Chemistry editorship ==
{{ewelcome}} --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 16:16, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I see Larry took care of this for you already.  I meant to do it this weekend but my
connection electron connections were not available. [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 16:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
:Congrats Milt! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 21:36, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
:: Thanks, Larry, David and Matt. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 22:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
:::So [[:Category:Chemistry_Developed_Articles|what]] are you going to approve first, Mr. Editor? :-) --Joe ([[User:Approvals Manager|Approvals Manager]]), 03:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
== Ketoconazole ==
Hello Milton.  No, I didn't have time to look at that during the week, but will give it a going over this weekend. [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 23:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
: Milton, I think I fixed [[ketoconazole]] to satisfaction (?).  I renamed the external links on the main page as '''Primary Sources''', because they are the primary sources, and I also repeated them on the External Links page, change the Related Articles stuff, etc.  Please take a look. In the meantime, I think I will try to make more columns for the Synonyms and Brand Names to condense the material. [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 13:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
::Okay, I am going to nominate the article. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 16:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
:::Milton, I have addressed most of the things mentioned by Anthony, but I am not sure why marijuana and beta-blockers are banned. The darn site went down just as I was making my last edits earlier today. [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 20:51, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
::::Perhaps this should be on the article page, but beta-blockers are performance-enhancing in shooting sports, by eliminating or minimizing benign tremor. For sports that require maximum cardiovascular output, they may decrease performance. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 00:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
== Re Drugs banned from the Olympics ==
Milton, I found David's changes satisfactory.  I give my co-approval. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 00:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
== Drug article approved! ==
Congratulations, Milton, the Olympics drug article was just approved (I hope) -- this time the process took, with my new, improved instructions written by me and continuously updated as I go along, 26 minutes including this note! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
:PS, it's not important to *me*, but it might be to others: when you (and I) tried yesterday or the day before to change the date of the version being approved, the date DID NOT CHANGE. It stayed at May 27, I think, instead of being changed to June 3rd or whatever. Do you know why?  Do you know how this *could* be done so that it would work in the future? Thanks! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 16:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
::I *know* that the version url changed as it should, because I checked that. However, I did not change the date of the nomination ... because I was not and am not aware that we were supposed to do that as well. I really don't think that it matters if the nomination date is also changed or not. Perhaps you should check that with Matt.
::I just re-read the instructions at [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Approval_Process#Updating_the_.22ToApprove.22_metadata_after_revision here] and it does not say that changing the nomination date is required. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Ah, okay, wuz just wondering. I personally think that if we've gonna go to all this trouble to make everything in the approval process so nit-pickin' perfect, then the date of the version approved for approval *ought* to be clearly visible as the actual date of the version approved. There are a thousand words in the approval process instructions about how to approve an *earlier* date, I think, but I haven't bothered to read them, on the grounds that they are too complicated and that I myself will *never* do it this way. Either I approve the absolute latest version or I won't approve anything at all. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 17:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
::::You're the Kop. If you think the date of the latest version is needed, simply change the instructions at [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Approval_Process#Updating_the_.22ToApprove.22_metadata_after_revision here] and I will do it in the future. It really only takes another few seconds to add a date. Its no big deal. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 19:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::Thanks for the link. Those are complicated instructions, so the hell with it. Approvals don't come up very often, and this particular sort of thing even less often. I'll worry about it the next time it happens. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 20:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::The important thing is that the version that is approved has been read and approved by all three editors. Otherwise, changes may be made that one of the editors did not get to read.  The date of the version is not important - it's the version.  But, that date does help me to determine if all three editors have seen the latest changes.  IF not, I approve the version that was last seen by all three.  Make sense... most of the time it is the last version, but sometimes it isn't.. and I think that on that occasion, it is an important distinction. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 00:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
== New Draft of the Week - formatting test ==
== New Draft of the Week - formatting test ==


Revision as of 23:14, 6 June 2009

New Draft of the Week - formatting test

Hi Milt, I have been fiddling around with the formatting of the Article of the Week and New Draft of the Week and would be thankful if you would play the guinea pig (in terms of testing the documentation) by changing the formatting for the New Drafts. I will also ask Howard and Sandy, so please do one article at a time. Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 05:03, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

As you know by now, I really like what you have done to the AOTW formatting. I can see that you have not yet completely done the same thing for the NDOTW. I would be pleased to help by being a guinea pig but I don't understand what you want me to do. Please spell out in detail what you want me to do ... and I will try it. Milton Beychok 05:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Milton_Beychok&oldid=383911"