User talk:Antony-22/Archive 1

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Antony-22, 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:

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --HappyCamper 03:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Nanotechnology and adsorption

Thanks for correcting my mistaken revert in the Nanotechnology article. Funnily enough I'd been introduced to adsorption by the Wikipedia article just a couple of weeks ago, but unfortunately it slipped my mind during an error/vandalism search.

Also, thanks for your contributions to the article in general! It's been fairly stagnant for a while, so it's nice to see the improvements you've made. — blobglob talk 01:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem; I figure "adsorb" is an uncommon enough word that someone could easily mistake it for "absorb". And, you're welcome! Antony-22 22:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Caltech Hovses

Hi, Antony-22! I just noticed the note you left (almost a month ago) on this page. I'm sorry I missed it then ... I was out of town for Christmas, so didn't follow activity as closely as I often do. Anyway, I'll take a stab at making the improvements you mentioned, since lots of people seem to think the article could be improved (although hardly anyone actually does anything about it ... I reverted "Ruddock rhymes with buttock" just a few days ago). Oh – I'm a Lloydie, 1973. Please feel free to leave a note on my talk page anytime. DavidCBryant 19:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Nanotechnology edit

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Nanotechnology. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Dskluz 02:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

response

Greetings [1]

Nice to see you in Wikiland. Know of any other Techers running around here? Antony-22 05:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Several, but they wish to edit only through aliases. Next time I see you, I can give you the list. Michaelbusch 06:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Merging policy

I was not sure if you were aware that the wikipedia policy on mergers (see Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages) requires that a merger is first "proposed" before it is performed. Typically you would allow a couple of weeks for others to comment on the merger before actually performing it. I noticed that you had not followed this procedure before the merge of Nanofactory into molecualar assembler. I have certain objections to this merger which I would have liked to discuss with you before it was performed. M stone 00:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I will be more careful in the future. Technically, the policy does not require a proposal but recommends it "if you are uncertain of the merger's appropriateness." I guess I should have realized that since in this case neither article was a stub, there might be questions about a merger. I'd still like to hear your objections though. My impression from reading both articles was that a nanofactory is essentially a collection of molecular assemblers; I didn't get a sense of how they were distinct concepts deserving separate articles. If this impression is inaccurate, I'm happy to redress the issue. Antony-22 10:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Personally I think that nanofactory is a bit more evolved concept than molecular assemblers. I think that there is more than enough content to support the page. It may be that a nanofactory is essentially a collection of molecular assemblers. However, I think that a jungle or an orchard deserve their own pages despite the fact that they are essentially a colllection of trees. It seems like concept of a "nanofactory" will evolve separately from a "molecular assembler" and will benefit from having its own page with a separate set of references and connectiviites. V8rik has written the drawbacks of mergers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:V8rik#On_mergers), which I generally agree with.
I support you effort to organize the nanotech area. I think that it has been generally very chaotic and could use some big picture organization. M stone 20:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hey, it's about time you had a barnstar.

The E=mc² Barnstar
Antony-22, for numerous contributions to technological articles. Axl 18:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


Yay! Antony-22 08:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Nanomat

Template:Nanomat has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. great work with Nanotechnology articles, I incorporated Nanomat into Nanotech, u wouldve noticed. ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗPeace Talks 10:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry mate. I never intended to undermine your work, I just thought I can improve the Nanotech template, and bring all the articles related to Nanotech together in one navbox, since you seem to be an expert on the subject, I leave it to your judgment whether we should have different navboxes or one. If you need any help on improving any please let me know, feel free to revert my edits on these templates if you think I am wrong. ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗPeace Talks 08:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Nanomaterials navbox

If you feel like it can be improved and used, go for it. There isn't a process for this, per se. If it had been 1 month since it was deleted, I'd be eh about it but 6 months is enough time. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 05:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Status

Hello, Antony-22. As you probably know, when your joining wikiprojects (e.g. wikiproject long island for instance) it is good to keep a statsuchanger so we know when to recruit you. Please install [[2]] the preceding onto link your monobook.js page. Nothing444 00:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

References

Hello, Antony-22. I ask you to make true references at nanoionics page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Despotuli (talk • contribs) 09:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


List of colleges and universities in metropolitan Boston

Good call. I think that's less overwhelming. Well done. Aepoutre (talk) 21:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Response->


WIkiProject Long Island Newsletter: A Whole New Volume!

Delivered by Nothing444 00:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

DNA nanotechnology

First, let me thank you for this article. I am translating it into Arabic (kinda difficult) :). Secondly, it would be much better if you used "move" button when you finish developing your article in your user space so that we can see its full history. the edits in the user space will be transformed into article space edits.--Alnokta (talk) 18:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

your wiki 'nanotechnology regulation' editing

Hi Antony.

On the whole, I see your edits to the 'nanotechnology regulation' page as useful. You've helped create and maintain a neutral point of view which was missing in places. Two concerns though: 1. By shifting this entire section from the main nanotechnology wiki site, putting the heading and link to the regulation article right at the bottom of that page and rewriting the modest amount of text that appears there, you've rendered this discussion much less visible than would have been the case. 2. You added a small section on 'nanosocialism'. This is not an idea that shows up in any references in our research, not a necessary or useful link in the context of a discussion about community expectations about regulation of science, and links to a very short and strange page with references to role-playing games. The overall impression is that you have attempted to marginalise the discussion of regulation.

I'd welcome your comments.

James —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.186.164 (talk) 06:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Response->

Thanks

Glad you liked it (: ——Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 05:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Harvard Bridge image

I really think the previous image shows the bridge better. - Denimadept (talk) 08:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Watertown bridge trivia

It's no less trivia just because you removed the header. - Denimadept (talk) 21:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5