User talk:Tpikonen

Category:Synchrotron radiation facilities

Hi there,

I noticed you created Category:Synchrotron radiation facilities. It turns out it's redundant with Category:Light sources, which I started populating a while ago but never finished. Anyway, we should merge the categories (or more precisely, do a {{categoryredirect}} so that a bot moves everything from one to the other), which is easy to do—the only question is, which do you think is the better name? -- SCZenz 16:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll move the Light Sources articles to the other ones, and do some other cosmetic work. I any work you can do on List_of_synchrotron_radiation_facilities, which I started but then never finished. -- SCZenz 17:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue light from synchrotron

Hi, I notice that you recently changed the caption to an image that I added to the article Synchrotron light from "synchrotron light emerging from a beam port" to "fluorescence of air caused by synchrotron radiation emerging from a beam port". How do you know that this is fluorescence of air though since this information was not provided at the original image site? I'm not saying your're wrong, I'd just like to know. I thought the blue light was merely rayleigh scattered blue light from the beam. It looks very monochromatic. I would think that if it were fluorescence of air, then the beam would have to be x-rays or short UV light and VERY very intense. Do you have experience with such things? --Deglr6328 17:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still here? could you help clear this up please? I'll have to revert it if you do not reply.--Deglr6328 20:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutron cross-section

Hi,

I just did a bunch of work on Neutron cross-section, which you also edited a while back. I have no idea if the text I broke into sections is correct, or will result in some poor Nuclear Engineering student accidentally causing fission and wiping out life on this planet. Could you have a read through and check for any egrigious errors on my part?

Thanks,

WLU 18:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of DESI-III

The article DESI-III has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSOFT due to lack of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. DrStrauss talk 20:24, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]