User talk:John P. Sadowski (NIOSH)/Archive 1

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Welcome

Hello, John P. Sadowski (NIOSH), and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

John P. Sadowski (NIOSH), good luck, and have fun. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, John P. Sadowski (NIOSH). You have new messages at Amortias's talk page.
Message added 23:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Amortias (T)(C) 23:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Intratracheal instillation

On 2 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Intratracheal instillation, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that intratracheal instillation, the introduction of a substance directly into the trachea, is a widely used alternative to inhalation for respiratory toxicity testing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Intratracheal instillation. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Intratracheal instillation), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Pharyngeal aspiration

On 11 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pharyngeal aspiration, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that pharyngeal aspiration is a widely used method for studying the respiratory toxicity of carbon nanotubes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pharyngeal aspiration. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pharyngeal aspiration), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

j'accuse

I have a problem with the nycosh.org/wp-content source used in Hazard elimination. That NYCOSH is putting what looks like non-official drivel into a folder specific for Wikipedia use creates the appearance of an employee self-publishing sources and using them here. I think this practice ought to stop. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Your concerns seem to be based on a few errors. First of all, I work for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a U.S. federal government agency. The source is from the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, an independent nonprofit organization. Second, "wp-content" is the standard name for a directory for media uploaded for WordPress; it has nothing to do with Wikipedia. There is no self-publishing going on here.
Do you consider the source to be unreliable? Looking through NYCOSH's publications, they seem reasonable, and a Google search doesn't reveal anything to call their legitimacy into question. If you have information that the source or publisher are unreliable, I would very much like to know about it so I can deal with it appropriately. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 06:41, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with NYCOSH as an entity. My concern is that the document cited doesn't look like an official publication but just what some employee typed up. I don't see the editorial control (whether for WordPress or Wikipedia) that I'd expect of a "reliable source" and as I've said, I think this practice ought to stop. I wouldn't take what the Governor of New York tweets as being reliable or official work product and I wouldn't accept this source, either. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
The layout leaves much to be desired, but the content is consistent with other sources. I have no reason to believe that the source is unreliable. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 19:00, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I found the original archived version here. It looks like someone just did a poor job of exporting it to a PDF when they changed the website. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 19:25, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. Had I seen the original version I probably would not have raised the issue. I was wrong to make the accusation. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:54, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hazard elimination

On 17 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hazard elimination, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the most desirable way to control a hazard is to eliminate it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hazard elimination. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hazard elimination), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sticky mat

On 18 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sticky mat, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that proper use of engineering controls should prevent contaminants from being excessively deposited on sticky mats at a laboratory's exits? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sticky mat. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sticky mat), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Occupational diving health and safety sources.

Hi John, My field of interest includes occupational diving health and safety. If you have good sources for anything in this field you can leave a link on my talk page or on the WikiProject Scuba diving discussion page. Or just edit the appropriate article/s. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Pbsouthwood: Thanks for the request. I've posted what I've found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scuba diving. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 22:08, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Louis René-Villermé

Although Mary Mark Ockerbloom didn't ping you, she has replied to your question on the nomination page, so you should be able to continue your review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:25, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Substitution of dangerous chemicals

Isn't this just talking about the same thing as Hazard substitution just using non standard terminology? I'm very tempted to turn the page into a redirect to Hazard substitution. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geni (talk • contribs) 17:11, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, hazard substitution applies not only to chemicals but also to equipment and processes, so substitution of chemicals is properly a subtopic of substitution. That being said, the Substitution of dangerous chemicals article covers chemicals in more detail but does have some issues (written by researcher citing their own research, refs are not inline, not always encyclopedic tone), so I would prefer to keep it in hopes that it is improved rather than trashing it or merging it to Hazard substitution. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 18:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough. Thank you for looking.©Geni (talk) 18:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hazard substitution

On 2 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hazard substitution, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that substitution of a hazardous chemical can backfire if it turns out to be a "regrettable substitution" that unwittingly introduces a new hazard? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hazard substitution. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hazard substitution), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 01:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Toilet plume

On 9 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Toilet plume, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that there is indirect, but unconfirmed, evidence of certain diseases being spread by toilet plume? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Toilet plume. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Toilet plume), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tapered element oscillating microbalance

On 20 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tapered element oscillating microbalance, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that personal dust monitors required for coal miners by the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration are based on the tapered element oscillating microbalance? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tapered element oscillating microbalance. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tapered element oscillating microbalance), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Health and safety hazards of nanomaterials

On 26 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Health and safety hazards of nanomaterials, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in animal studies of the health and safety hazards of nanomaterials, carbon nanotubes had similar inhalation exposure effects to asbestos? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Health and safety hazards of nanomaterials. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Health and safety hazards of nanomaterials), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Radioactive nanoparticle

On 2 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Radioactive nanoparticle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that radioactive nanoparticles are being investigated as a treatment for cancer? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Radioactive nanoparticle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Radioactive nanoparticle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Occupational epidemiology

Alex ShihTalk 00:04, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Titanium dioxide nanoparticle

On 9 October 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Titanium dioxide nanoparticle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that titanium dioxide nanoparticles prevent cancer when used in sunscreens, but may cause it if inhaled by production workers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Titanium dioxide nanoparticle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Titanium dioxide nanoparticle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:31, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Graphene

Could I ask you some more informations about graphene? I don’t understand some cardinals point Eugeniocazzo (talk) 23:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Eugeniocazzo: Sure, I'll try to help answer any questions!

Thank you. Well firstly I don’t understand how the structure of a material can change its properties: if i take one atom layer of gold it has the same properties as if I had taken a block of it, right ? But then graphene doesn’t follow this logic because from my understanding if you take only one atom layer of graphite you get a layer of graphene ( please correct me if I’m being completely wrong ). Second question - while reading about graphene properties I found out that 10 one atom layer of graphene could stop most common bullet fired from even quite powerful shotguns, if so how is this possible? We wouldn’t even be able do see such thin “walls” and yet they would be able to stop such a strong impact, it doesn’t make sense for what concerns current physic. Excuse me for the badly written english but I’m not a native speaker. Hoping to understand a little more about graphene. Eugeniocazzo (talk) 15:44, 23 November 2017 (UTC)


Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5