![]() | This user may have left Wikipedia. Afluegel has not edited Wikipedia since September 15, 2009. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Thanks for letting me know.
I trust that you have kept the old Jospeh Chance article on file at this stage. I have a friend who knows quite a lot about the Chance brothers. He is getting boradband in about 2 weeks time, and will be looking at these articles as a project when he has registered himself as a contributor to Wikipedia. One of the things he told me is about Alexander Chance having bought Lightwoods Park for the borough. Being retired, he will have a lot more time than myself to devote to this, as well as having recently read up on the Chances. Long term, it may be better to drop the separate Joseph Chance article. But for now we shall see what my friend makes of it. Best wishes Robert of Ramsor ( talk) 22:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have no idea how my talk page has ended up in those categories, it certainly isn't intentional. Some sort of bug I guess, I can't tell how to remove my talk page from those categories! I'll ask at the help desk... Polyamorph ( talk) 23:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Since there is a category for British stained glass artists, I can't understand why you moved them out of it and into the general category of Glas art. Are you planning on getting rid of the more specific category? If not, then they belong in it. Amandajm ( talk) 08:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, although I am delighted editors such as Logger9 are taking an interest in the Glass article, I feel this is not in the article's best interest - it is far too long, entirely uncited, repeats information already given, is too technical, might even have some aspects of original research and in places is incorrect. Just a heads up to make sure this doesn't get out of control. Cheers Polyamorph ( talk) 21:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been meaning to give you this for some time...
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your extensive efforts and contributions to the Glass article and related topics including setting up the Glass pre-project and taskforce. Polyamorph ( talk) 21:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
As you can see, I have created another article -- this one focusing on the nature of the glass transition from a physicist's viewpoint.
Please let me know what you think -- and how you would recommend that I proceed. I am currently working on an appropriate Introduction for the article.
Hope all is well :-) -- logger9 ( talk) 08:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Alright, let's talk about some details.
That's it for now. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 15:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I've set up the project at WP:GLASS. Article alerts and "new articles" will take a day or two to set up. I'll work on it some more, but you and others can expand it as you see it. I'll let you contact other people. You can also start assessing articles /give them importance ratings. The relevant categories aren't yet created, but I will set them up in the near future (don't set them up yourself for now, there's some things I need to do with them). Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 06:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
As you can see, I have created yet another article -- this one focusing on the nature of structural transformations in solids as seen from a physicist's viewpoint (with a bit of Fourier theory). Please advise. I am currently working on an appropriate Introduction.
Special request: Could someone please make the equations look prettier ?? (see the last 2 sections) Hope all is well :-) -- logger9 ( talk) 08:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
You definitely need a fresh article on the subject of "Diffusion in solids". Your current version just touches the tip of the iceberg. I have ordered a fresh copy of Shewmon's text from Amazon (I misplaced my copy from grad school) and I will try to create a rough draft as soon as it arrives. -- logger9 ( talk) 06:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I am not allowed to move to "Glass transition" as long as it already exists (with a redirect to "Glass-liquid transition"). What next ? Do I need to contact an administrator ?? -- logger9 ( talk) 21:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't bother wasting time doing so, I'll make it part of the bot request for the assessement. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 22:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do. Amandajm ( talk) 22:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
With your permission, I would like to go ahead and transfer (merge) Ojovan's work on the glass transition to the main page. I have already provided a section for it there. Please advise. -- logger9 ( talk) 20:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Somewhere recently here, I saw a question about why bundles of glass fiber don't crack or fail when they are dropped the floor. Well folks: here is my first shot at the answer. I would welcome input, as the article should improve somewhat with time. I'm still trying to dig up old articles I had when I was working in fiber optics development. I would like to get it up and running ASAP (with the appropriate Wiki tag for an article under construction) so please advise ! -- logger9 ( talk) 06:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Please don't put an article in two categories, where one is a subcategory of the other. The guidelines discourage this.-- Srleffler ( talk) 18:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The bit that you moved to stained glass... Can we illustrate it with pictures of stained glass windows that use the various colours? Some of the info that it contains pertains specifically to bottles and the like. Is none of it relevant to the page that it came from? A person wanting to know how green bottles are coloured probably wouldn't look on the stained glass page.
Also, a new editor created a page on Medieval stained glass. This has probably come to your notice. Ther has been suggestions of a merge. In fact, it is an important article that needs to be greatly extended.
Amandajm ( talk) 09:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
This is a stunning picture. However, your uncertainty about the type of glass used in the greater part of the window, and the caption is really unencyclopedic. It looks like early plate glass. Amandajm ( talk) 02:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC) The problem with the term "plate glass" is that is is used as an alternative for "flat glass" or "window glass". Amandajm ( talk) 03:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
OK. This is the big one that I have been working up to. Please....try to be gentle !!! -- logger9 ( talk) 08:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
What is inappropriate about a link to furnace in a glass making article? Quote: "A furnace is a device used for heating." In the article, "furnace" is the word used for the device used to heat the raw materials to make glass. What is your point in reverting the link? Hu ( talk) 17:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
There has been no opposition over the past couple of months to the proposed merger of the brief article on Transparency (optics) to the main article on Transparent materials. With your permission, I would like to proceed with the merger using a redirect, and suggest that the main article be placed within the scope of Glass Science. -- logger9 ( talk) 17:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Recently, a 21 kB article has been reduced back down to 7 kB (see discussion here.) Apparently, one of the original authors is unhappy with my work, and unwilling to accept any of it whatsoever. Thus, I have republished my changes to the article on Transparent alumina here. Please feel free to review and advise. -- logger9 ( talk) 20:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
i have seriously been trying to bite my lip while Star Trek fans have their fun (I am a huge fan myself !) But regardless of what Scottie may or may not have said in any given episode, the article on Transparent aluminum is rapidly becoming an embarrassment to Wikipedia.
A solid object may be not transparent either because it reflects the incoming light or because it absorbs the incoming light. Of course, almost all solids reflect a part and absorb a part of the incoming light.
For example, when light falls onto a block of metal, it encounters atoms that are tightly packed in a regular lattice and a "sea of electrons" moving randomly between the atoms. These randomly placed electrons move chaotically (and dissipatively) between the ordered atoms of a typical polycrystalline metallic solid. This is the nature of the metallic bond.
Most of the light is scattered back from this kind of material, which is precisely why we see a shiny metal surface. Metals reflect most of the light because they have free electrons -- and no matter how small you make the "metallic beads" they will still have those free electrons !
These electrons are shaken by the electric field of the light which is an electromagnetic wave, and emit two waves. One wave is in the direction of the incoming wave, which is visible as the reflected wave. The other wave is similar in amplitude and in the same direction as the incoming wave. But since they are not traveling in phase, the deconstructive interference gives rise to a zero amplitude wave. Thus no light is transmitted through liquid or solid metals.
This is NOT a Star Trek episode.
This is the physical reality of Transparent materials.
-- logger9 ( talk) 19:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't reply sooner, I was rather busy in the last weeks (and will be in the weeks ahead too). I'll drop by the project every now and then to see how things go. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
A new user has merged the glass transition temperature with the glass transition -- and is currently attempting to remove the entire previous contents of the original article. Her radically aggressive "slash and burn" editing techniques are completely inappropriate, and totally out of sync with standard Wikipedia protocol. She is obsessively persistent -- and somewhat irrational (cursing me and calling me names like "shameless"). Please advise. -- logger9 ( talk) 21:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The same "slash and burn" editor User:Paula_Pilcher is now formulating her attack on the Physics of glass page. It would not surprise me if it were gone by morning. -- logger9 ( talk) 22:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
With no notification whatsoever, I just happened to notice that the article on Strength of glass has been removed in its entirety due to copyright violation. I went to the website they mentioned, and have to say that I have never even seen it before. It is certainly true that I have read and reviewed and relied heavily on the work of Kurkijan (and would be glad to rewrite the article if necessary). But these actions seem to me to be unfounded -- and radically destructive. Please advise -- logger9 ( talk) 21:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
As per your suggestion, I have removed the bulk of my contributions from the table you presented here and created a new Wiki article under the above title, which I will be working on in the coming weeks. Thank you very much for your continuing help and guidance in this matter. -- logger9 ( talk) 20:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Just as a courtesy, I'm letting you know I've removed your latest post from that page. I don't think it was helpful in ending the current situation, and it wasn't really the appropriate place to post it anyway. Please see the edit history for my original response. Thanks. Exploding Boy ( talk) 07:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Aside from the introduction, the entire article on Plastic deformation in solids was removed. What recourse do I have, if any ?? -- logger9 ( talk) 22:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Afluegel!
I'd like to ask you this out of the formality of the talk page, and so that others can have time to respond, per your request. The phenominon were discussing seems to be solidification, or freezing. From the freezing article and the web definitions of vitrified: Vitrified is to be frozen, without crystalizing, into a glass. That seems to describe the transition itself. The Tg seems to be the process through which this occurs. Would I be correct in assuming that both are different aspects of the phenominon, freezing, and that it would be impossible to define one without defining the other? (Something like trying to define gravity without defining weight?)
I do notice that at least one of your examples, the second to the last one posted, says "the transition", and I would assume that, in a source that is about glass, it may be common to omit the unnecessary word "glass" before the word transition. Is that plausible?
To me, it seems that an article should bear the most exact name of what the article is actually about In this case, the freezing-in, or vitrification process. And it should clarify better than the freezing article the aspects of how the two differ, those aspects being Tg and the transition, both.
Thanks for all of your help. Zaereth ( talk) 21:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Can you provide a reference, or somewhere for me to look for this image you uploaded (in the Index of Refraction: Relation to Density page) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Density-nd.GIF
Thanks, Demis ( talk) 22:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Afluegel, I've been thinking that we should have a special glass looking barnstar to be awarded to users who contribute to improving glass related articles. I'm not sure how we could do this, maybe we could request one be made or try and make it ourselves. What do you think? Polyamorph ( talk) 14:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Category:Glass history ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:History of glass ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 03:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Glass property.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 15:27, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
in order to avoid bubbles, do you think? ( Martin | talk • contribs 23:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC))
Hello Afluegel, I hope you don't mind but since you have not edited in over a year and were previously a prolific editor on glass related articles I have added your name to the list at WP:MISSYOU. I hope that you come back and are able to remove yourself from the list. But if not I hope you are well and enjoying your time away from wikipedia. All the best Polyamorph ( talk) 22:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This user may have left Wikipedia. Afluegel has not edited Wikipedia since since September 15, 2009. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Category:Glass forming, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 23:38, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Category:Common oxide glass components, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 18:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Category:Glass science institutes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 06:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
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)
16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Category:Glass makers and brands, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder ( talk) 11:48, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:SpiderGraph Abbe Number.gif requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of http://glassproperties.com/abbe_number/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. House Blaster talk 16:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This user may have left Wikipedia. Afluegel has not edited Wikipedia since September 15, 2009. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Thanks for letting me know.
I trust that you have kept the old Jospeh Chance article on file at this stage. I have a friend who knows quite a lot about the Chance brothers. He is getting boradband in about 2 weeks time, and will be looking at these articles as a project when he has registered himself as a contributor to Wikipedia. One of the things he told me is about Alexander Chance having bought Lightwoods Park for the borough. Being retired, he will have a lot more time than myself to devote to this, as well as having recently read up on the Chances. Long term, it may be better to drop the separate Joseph Chance article. But for now we shall see what my friend makes of it. Best wishes Robert of Ramsor ( talk) 22:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have no idea how my talk page has ended up in those categories, it certainly isn't intentional. Some sort of bug I guess, I can't tell how to remove my talk page from those categories! I'll ask at the help desk... Polyamorph ( talk) 23:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Since there is a category for British stained glass artists, I can't understand why you moved them out of it and into the general category of Glas art. Are you planning on getting rid of the more specific category? If not, then they belong in it. Amandajm ( talk) 08:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, although I am delighted editors such as Logger9 are taking an interest in the Glass article, I feel this is not in the article's best interest - it is far too long, entirely uncited, repeats information already given, is too technical, might even have some aspects of original research and in places is incorrect. Just a heads up to make sure this doesn't get out of control. Cheers Polyamorph ( talk) 21:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been meaning to give you this for some time...
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your extensive efforts and contributions to the Glass article and related topics including setting up the Glass pre-project and taskforce. Polyamorph ( talk) 21:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
As you can see, I have created another article -- this one focusing on the nature of the glass transition from a physicist's viewpoint.
Please let me know what you think -- and how you would recommend that I proceed. I am currently working on an appropriate Introduction for the article.
Hope all is well :-) -- logger9 ( talk) 08:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Alright, let's talk about some details.
That's it for now. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 15:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I've set up the project at WP:GLASS. Article alerts and "new articles" will take a day or two to set up. I'll work on it some more, but you and others can expand it as you see it. I'll let you contact other people. You can also start assessing articles /give them importance ratings. The relevant categories aren't yet created, but I will set them up in the near future (don't set them up yourself for now, there's some things I need to do with them). Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 06:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
As you can see, I have created yet another article -- this one focusing on the nature of structural transformations in solids as seen from a physicist's viewpoint (with a bit of Fourier theory). Please advise. I am currently working on an appropriate Introduction.
Special request: Could someone please make the equations look prettier ?? (see the last 2 sections) Hope all is well :-) -- logger9 ( talk) 08:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
You definitely need a fresh article on the subject of "Diffusion in solids". Your current version just touches the tip of the iceberg. I have ordered a fresh copy of Shewmon's text from Amazon (I misplaced my copy from grad school) and I will try to create a rough draft as soon as it arrives. -- logger9 ( talk) 06:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I am not allowed to move to "Glass transition" as long as it already exists (with a redirect to "Glass-liquid transition"). What next ? Do I need to contact an administrator ?? -- logger9 ( talk) 21:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't bother wasting time doing so, I'll make it part of the bot request for the assessement. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 22:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do. Amandajm ( talk) 22:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
With your permission, I would like to go ahead and transfer (merge) Ojovan's work on the glass transition to the main page. I have already provided a section for it there. Please advise. -- logger9 ( talk) 20:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Somewhere recently here, I saw a question about why bundles of glass fiber don't crack or fail when they are dropped the floor. Well folks: here is my first shot at the answer. I would welcome input, as the article should improve somewhat with time. I'm still trying to dig up old articles I had when I was working in fiber optics development. I would like to get it up and running ASAP (with the appropriate Wiki tag for an article under construction) so please advise ! -- logger9 ( talk) 06:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Please don't put an article in two categories, where one is a subcategory of the other. The guidelines discourage this.-- Srleffler ( talk) 18:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The bit that you moved to stained glass... Can we illustrate it with pictures of stained glass windows that use the various colours? Some of the info that it contains pertains specifically to bottles and the like. Is none of it relevant to the page that it came from? A person wanting to know how green bottles are coloured probably wouldn't look on the stained glass page.
Also, a new editor created a page on Medieval stained glass. This has probably come to your notice. Ther has been suggestions of a merge. In fact, it is an important article that needs to be greatly extended.
Amandajm ( talk) 09:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
This is a stunning picture. However, your uncertainty about the type of glass used in the greater part of the window, and the caption is really unencyclopedic. It looks like early plate glass. Amandajm ( talk) 02:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC) The problem with the term "plate glass" is that is is used as an alternative for "flat glass" or "window glass". Amandajm ( talk) 03:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
OK. This is the big one that I have been working up to. Please....try to be gentle !!! -- logger9 ( talk) 08:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
What is inappropriate about a link to furnace in a glass making article? Quote: "A furnace is a device used for heating." In the article, "furnace" is the word used for the device used to heat the raw materials to make glass. What is your point in reverting the link? Hu ( talk) 17:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
There has been no opposition over the past couple of months to the proposed merger of the brief article on Transparency (optics) to the main article on Transparent materials. With your permission, I would like to proceed with the merger using a redirect, and suggest that the main article be placed within the scope of Glass Science. -- logger9 ( talk) 17:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Recently, a 21 kB article has been reduced back down to 7 kB (see discussion here.) Apparently, one of the original authors is unhappy with my work, and unwilling to accept any of it whatsoever. Thus, I have republished my changes to the article on Transparent alumina here. Please feel free to review and advise. -- logger9 ( talk) 20:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
i have seriously been trying to bite my lip while Star Trek fans have their fun (I am a huge fan myself !) But regardless of what Scottie may or may not have said in any given episode, the article on Transparent aluminum is rapidly becoming an embarrassment to Wikipedia.
A solid object may be not transparent either because it reflects the incoming light or because it absorbs the incoming light. Of course, almost all solids reflect a part and absorb a part of the incoming light.
For example, when light falls onto a block of metal, it encounters atoms that are tightly packed in a regular lattice and a "sea of electrons" moving randomly between the atoms. These randomly placed electrons move chaotically (and dissipatively) between the ordered atoms of a typical polycrystalline metallic solid. This is the nature of the metallic bond.
Most of the light is scattered back from this kind of material, which is precisely why we see a shiny metal surface. Metals reflect most of the light because they have free electrons -- and no matter how small you make the "metallic beads" they will still have those free electrons !
These electrons are shaken by the electric field of the light which is an electromagnetic wave, and emit two waves. One wave is in the direction of the incoming wave, which is visible as the reflected wave. The other wave is similar in amplitude and in the same direction as the incoming wave. But since they are not traveling in phase, the deconstructive interference gives rise to a zero amplitude wave. Thus no light is transmitted through liquid or solid metals.
This is NOT a Star Trek episode.
This is the physical reality of Transparent materials.
-- logger9 ( talk) 19:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't reply sooner, I was rather busy in the last weeks (and will be in the weeks ahead too). I'll drop by the project every now and then to see how things go. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
A new user has merged the glass transition temperature with the glass transition -- and is currently attempting to remove the entire previous contents of the original article. Her radically aggressive "slash and burn" editing techniques are completely inappropriate, and totally out of sync with standard Wikipedia protocol. She is obsessively persistent -- and somewhat irrational (cursing me and calling me names like "shameless"). Please advise. -- logger9 ( talk) 21:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The same "slash and burn" editor User:Paula_Pilcher is now formulating her attack on the Physics of glass page. It would not surprise me if it were gone by morning. -- logger9 ( talk) 22:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
With no notification whatsoever, I just happened to notice that the article on Strength of glass has been removed in its entirety due to copyright violation. I went to the website they mentioned, and have to say that I have never even seen it before. It is certainly true that I have read and reviewed and relied heavily on the work of Kurkijan (and would be glad to rewrite the article if necessary). But these actions seem to me to be unfounded -- and radically destructive. Please advise -- logger9 ( talk) 21:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
As per your suggestion, I have removed the bulk of my contributions from the table you presented here and created a new Wiki article under the above title, which I will be working on in the coming weeks. Thank you very much for your continuing help and guidance in this matter. -- logger9 ( talk) 20:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Just as a courtesy, I'm letting you know I've removed your latest post from that page. I don't think it was helpful in ending the current situation, and it wasn't really the appropriate place to post it anyway. Please see the edit history for my original response. Thanks. Exploding Boy ( talk) 07:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Aside from the introduction, the entire article on Plastic deformation in solids was removed. What recourse do I have, if any ?? -- logger9 ( talk) 22:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Afluegel!
I'd like to ask you this out of the formality of the talk page, and so that others can have time to respond, per your request. The phenominon were discussing seems to be solidification, or freezing. From the freezing article and the web definitions of vitrified: Vitrified is to be frozen, without crystalizing, into a glass. That seems to describe the transition itself. The Tg seems to be the process through which this occurs. Would I be correct in assuming that both are different aspects of the phenominon, freezing, and that it would be impossible to define one without defining the other? (Something like trying to define gravity without defining weight?)
I do notice that at least one of your examples, the second to the last one posted, says "the transition", and I would assume that, in a source that is about glass, it may be common to omit the unnecessary word "glass" before the word transition. Is that plausible?
To me, it seems that an article should bear the most exact name of what the article is actually about In this case, the freezing-in, or vitrification process. And it should clarify better than the freezing article the aspects of how the two differ, those aspects being Tg and the transition, both.
Thanks for all of your help. Zaereth ( talk) 21:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Can you provide a reference, or somewhere for me to look for this image you uploaded (in the Index of Refraction: Relation to Density page) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Density-nd.GIF
Thanks, Demis ( talk) 22:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Afluegel, I've been thinking that we should have a special glass looking barnstar to be awarded to users who contribute to improving glass related articles. I'm not sure how we could do this, maybe we could request one be made or try and make it ourselves. What do you think? Polyamorph ( talk) 14:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Category:Glass history ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:History of glass ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 03:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Glass property.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 15:27, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
in order to avoid bubbles, do you think? ( Martin | talk • contribs 23:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC))
Hello Afluegel, I hope you don't mind but since you have not edited in over a year and were previously a prolific editor on glass related articles I have added your name to the list at WP:MISSYOU. I hope that you come back and are able to remove yourself from the list. But if not I hope you are well and enjoying your time away from wikipedia. All the best Polyamorph ( talk) 22:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This user may have left Wikipedia. Afluegel has not edited Wikipedia since since September 15, 2009. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Category:Glass forming, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 23:38, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Category:Common oxide glass components, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 18:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Category:Glass science institutes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 06:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
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)
16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Category:Glass makers and brands, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder ( talk) 11:48, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:SpiderGraph Abbe Number.gif requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of http://glassproperties.com/abbe_number/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. House Blaster talk 16:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)