I would like to discuss if it was necessary to create a redirect to gyroscopic exercise tool from the powerball (exercise tool) page. Powerball is the brand name known to all users of such exercise tool and it is important as the Coca-Cola for soft drinks. Moreover Powerballs are provided with the precisely calibrated rotors and electronic revolutions counter, which is lacking on competitors devices. It also well known for the build quality and life-long warranty.
I spent lot of time fixing that Powerball page removing vandalism and adding additional information, like photos and model range updates, so I will highly appreciate if you change your opinion on this subject and revert changes you made to that page by yourself.
-- Dmitrek ( talk) 18:51, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I have seen that you are listed under Wikiproject Volleyball. Some players articles, most of them looks outdated. I would like to improve players by country. Could you please choose a country to contribute with? Please take a look on Yekaterina Gamova, Hélia Souza, Serena Ortolani and Kenia Carcaces for a model to follow. Please can you please improve some volleyball players with infobox and some addons? References are very important. Let me know. Oscar987 21:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Racecarr, can we both agree (despite what may have been writen) that energy and torque are different?
If so let’s see if we can make the foot-pound (energy) page better. I would purpose a compromise between your level of understand or amount of information on the page and my level of understand or amount of information on the page. I want an elementry school level of communication and a lot more info. Do you think we can compromise?
I will do a rewite containing what you have posted this morning and then submit it here on your discusion page as a new thread called Foot-pound rewrite. Then, you have at it and I’ll come back an look in a few days. Lets see if we can do better.
Also, can we rename the Pound-foot page “foot-pound (torque)”? Greg Glover ( talk) 19:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I had a thought to help end the edit warring. You have the PhD. I have the H.S. Diploma. In the real world that you and I live, you are the most qualified; that’s just a fact. So, in spirit of cooperation, I will let you review any edits to pages or any page I create (as it pertains to the three subsystems of FPS) before the edits/page are posted.
Are you amicable to that?
Also, I just reformatted the math on the Pound force page from typed format (QWERT) to Wiki math format (HTML). Is that okay?
And, great job on cleaning up the pound force page!!! Greg Glover ( talk) 18:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Raceccar,
I have done my research. The word “pound foot” does not appear in any dictionary or encyclopedia as a word or term. The word/term appears only once as an A.K.A for the "Foot pound" in the Mc Graw-Hill Dictionary of Science and Technology Terms; 5th Edition.
Therefore, if you agree. The Pound-foot (torque) page should be renamed (or redirected to) Foot-pound (torque). How others wish to edit that page is up to them. I could careless about that page in its currant form, except for the page name.
If you and others agree, then maybe someone who knows the Wiki procedure for renaming or redirecting can do it. Greg Glover ( talk) 18:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The foot-pound force, or simply foot-pound (symbol: ft-lbf or ft-lb) is a unit of work or energy in the Engineering and Gravitational Systems in United States customary and Imperial units of measure. It is the energy transferred on applying a force of 1 pound-force (lbf) through a displacement of 1 foot. The corresponding SI unit is the joule.
Usage
The foot-pound is often used to specify the muzzle energy of a bullet in small arms ballistics, particularly in the United States.
"Foot-pound" is sometimes also used as a unit of torque (see Pound-foot (torque)). In the United States this unit is often used to specify, for example, the tightness of a bolt or the output of an engine. Although they are dimensionally equivalent, energy (a scalar), and torque (a vector) are distinct physical quantities. Both energy and torque can be expressed as a product of a force vector with a displacement vector (hence pounds and feet); energy is the dot product of the two, and torque is the cross product.
Other units of energy
1 foot-pound is equivalent to:
Related units of power
See also
Greg Glover ( talk) 19:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
How does this look to you? For clarification I put the subcategories in bold so it was easier to edit. As a page we can add back the HTML symbols (==xxx==). Greg Glover ( talk) 19:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, these are the two a's i'm talking about; (a scalar), and torque (a vector). Can we remove them?. Greg Glover ( talk) 17:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, that's it. If you want to move the finished product over to Foot-pound (energy) page that's okay with me. Also, if you want to delete this work that's okay too. I takes up a lot of space on your discussion page. Greg Glover ( talk) 00:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Good afternoon Rracecarr,
would be interested in heading up a “Task force” to clean up and standardize all the pages (stubs) that pertain the Foot-Pound-Second System (FPS). The writings and math for pages like Poundal and Foot-poundal is all over the place. I checked out the Pound (mass) page. What are people thinking and for what reason was the Foot-Pound-Second System page redirected to the Pound (mass) page? See here for the proposal.
I would be more than glad to do as much of the work as possible. I think
User:Dorminton and
User:MarcusMaximus would support this proposal. If you are interested, I will leave a message for Dorminton, MarcusMaximus and anyone else that might be interested.
Greg Glover (
talk)
20:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Rracecarr,
over the weekend, several of us had what you might call a "spirited" debate on the very question of "tennis player" being used twice in the sentence. A moderator was even called in to adjudicate. Please keep the wording as it was ... and feel free to examine the discussion on the Federer talkpage.
yours, Schpinbo ( talk) 23:06, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot ( error?) 08:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)I'm afraid I've put your article on Annie Thorisdottir up for AfD. It may well be that she passes WP:GNG, I'm honestly not sure. But it seems like the use of CrossFit related sources should be something that other editors at least have a look at. At the worst you'll get input on improving sourcing. Cheers. In ictu oculi ( talk) 05:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I blanked this article as a copyvio CrossFit. You have done a lot of work on it, the other users listed as editors have either been banned as socks or are limited use IP accounts. From your edits it appears you at least attempted to improve some of the very badly written text. However, in attempting to find portions of text that are not from the corporate websites, I found that almost all of the article is just copied and pasted.
It requires an entire rewrite. It would be nice to have it rewritten as an encyclopedia article. -- AfadsBad ( talk) 22:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Profiling float, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conductivity ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Lane splitting. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — TransporterMan ( TALK) 16:22, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
The article Magnus hitch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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.
Stuartyeates (
talk)
07:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
The article Gyroscopic exercise tool has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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.
Guy (
Help!)
17:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Rracecarr, SAR11, oceans' most abundant organism, has been in the news.
I saw the article, strangely no image of possibly the commonest living organism in the world exists on Commons. Since I'm doing a MOOC with UCSD on Climate Change, I thought that a Scripps Institution user could possibly help out.
AshLin (
talk)
16:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited CrossFit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swimming. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2007 CrossFit Games, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pullup. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:12, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Please stop moving the Anthony Davis page. Your undiscussed move was reverted. If you want to move the page, take it to RM. Guettarda ( talk) 04:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
You must STOP edit warring over the question of Anthony Davis and disambiguation. You have been told, over and over, that your preferred person
Anthony Davis (basketball) is not the primary meaning of "Anthony Davis". You have repeatedly requested deletion of the page
Anthony Davis because you want to put the basketball player there, and you have falsely claimed that this deletion would be uncontroversial. You have tried to redirect the page
Anthony Davis to your hero. You are way past the point of
WP:3RR on this matter, and if you do it again, you are likely to be blocked for edit warring. --
MelanieN (
talk)
02:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I would like to discuss if it was necessary to create a redirect to gyroscopic exercise tool from the powerball (exercise tool) page. Powerball is the brand name known to all users of such exercise tool and it is important as the Coca-Cola for soft drinks. Moreover Powerballs are provided with the precisely calibrated rotors and electronic revolutions counter, which is lacking on competitors devices. It also well known for the build quality and life-long warranty.
I spent lot of time fixing that Powerball page removing vandalism and adding additional information, like photos and model range updates, so I will highly appreciate if you change your opinion on this subject and revert changes you made to that page by yourself.
-- Dmitrek ( talk) 18:51, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I have seen that you are listed under Wikiproject Volleyball. Some players articles, most of them looks outdated. I would like to improve players by country. Could you please choose a country to contribute with? Please take a look on Yekaterina Gamova, Hélia Souza, Serena Ortolani and Kenia Carcaces for a model to follow. Please can you please improve some volleyball players with infobox and some addons? References are very important. Let me know. Oscar987 21:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Racecarr, can we both agree (despite what may have been writen) that energy and torque are different?
If so let’s see if we can make the foot-pound (energy) page better. I would purpose a compromise between your level of understand or amount of information on the page and my level of understand or amount of information on the page. I want an elementry school level of communication and a lot more info. Do you think we can compromise?
I will do a rewite containing what you have posted this morning and then submit it here on your discusion page as a new thread called Foot-pound rewrite. Then, you have at it and I’ll come back an look in a few days. Lets see if we can do better.
Also, can we rename the Pound-foot page “foot-pound (torque)”? Greg Glover ( talk) 19:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I had a thought to help end the edit warring. You have the PhD. I have the H.S. Diploma. In the real world that you and I live, you are the most qualified; that’s just a fact. So, in spirit of cooperation, I will let you review any edits to pages or any page I create (as it pertains to the three subsystems of FPS) before the edits/page are posted.
Are you amicable to that?
Also, I just reformatted the math on the Pound force page from typed format (QWERT) to Wiki math format (HTML). Is that okay?
And, great job on cleaning up the pound force page!!! Greg Glover ( talk) 18:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Raceccar,
I have done my research. The word “pound foot” does not appear in any dictionary or encyclopedia as a word or term. The word/term appears only once as an A.K.A for the "Foot pound" in the Mc Graw-Hill Dictionary of Science and Technology Terms; 5th Edition.
Therefore, if you agree. The Pound-foot (torque) page should be renamed (or redirected to) Foot-pound (torque). How others wish to edit that page is up to them. I could careless about that page in its currant form, except for the page name.
If you and others agree, then maybe someone who knows the Wiki procedure for renaming or redirecting can do it. Greg Glover ( talk) 18:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The foot-pound force, or simply foot-pound (symbol: ft-lbf or ft-lb) is a unit of work or energy in the Engineering and Gravitational Systems in United States customary and Imperial units of measure. It is the energy transferred on applying a force of 1 pound-force (lbf) through a displacement of 1 foot. The corresponding SI unit is the joule.
Usage
The foot-pound is often used to specify the muzzle energy of a bullet in small arms ballistics, particularly in the United States.
"Foot-pound" is sometimes also used as a unit of torque (see Pound-foot (torque)). In the United States this unit is often used to specify, for example, the tightness of a bolt or the output of an engine. Although they are dimensionally equivalent, energy (a scalar), and torque (a vector) are distinct physical quantities. Both energy and torque can be expressed as a product of a force vector with a displacement vector (hence pounds and feet); energy is the dot product of the two, and torque is the cross product.
Other units of energy
1 foot-pound is equivalent to:
Related units of power
See also
Greg Glover ( talk) 19:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
How does this look to you? For clarification I put the subcategories in bold so it was easier to edit. As a page we can add back the HTML symbols (==xxx==). Greg Glover ( talk) 19:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, these are the two a's i'm talking about; (a scalar), and torque (a vector). Can we remove them?. Greg Glover ( talk) 17:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, that's it. If you want to move the finished product over to Foot-pound (energy) page that's okay with me. Also, if you want to delete this work that's okay too. I takes up a lot of space on your discussion page. Greg Glover ( talk) 00:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Good afternoon Rracecarr,
would be interested in heading up a “Task force” to clean up and standardize all the pages (stubs) that pertain the Foot-Pound-Second System (FPS). The writings and math for pages like Poundal and Foot-poundal is all over the place. I checked out the Pound (mass) page. What are people thinking and for what reason was the Foot-Pound-Second System page redirected to the Pound (mass) page? See here for the proposal.
I would be more than glad to do as much of the work as possible. I think
User:Dorminton and
User:MarcusMaximus would support this proposal. If you are interested, I will leave a message for Dorminton, MarcusMaximus and anyone else that might be interested.
Greg Glover (
talk)
20:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Rracecarr,
over the weekend, several of us had what you might call a "spirited" debate on the very question of "tennis player" being used twice in the sentence. A moderator was even called in to adjudicate. Please keep the wording as it was ... and feel free to examine the discussion on the Federer talkpage.
yours, Schpinbo ( talk) 23:06, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot ( error?) 08:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)I'm afraid I've put your article on Annie Thorisdottir up for AfD. It may well be that she passes WP:GNG, I'm honestly not sure. But it seems like the use of CrossFit related sources should be something that other editors at least have a look at. At the worst you'll get input on improving sourcing. Cheers. In ictu oculi ( talk) 05:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I blanked this article as a copyvio CrossFit. You have done a lot of work on it, the other users listed as editors have either been banned as socks or are limited use IP accounts. From your edits it appears you at least attempted to improve some of the very badly written text. However, in attempting to find portions of text that are not from the corporate websites, I found that almost all of the article is just copied and pasted.
It requires an entire rewrite. It would be nice to have it rewritten as an encyclopedia article. -- AfadsBad ( talk) 22:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Profiling float, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conductivity ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Lane splitting. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — TransporterMan ( TALK) 16:22, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
The article Magnus hitch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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.
Stuartyeates (
talk)
07:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
The article Gyroscopic exercise tool has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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.
Guy (
Help!)
17:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Rracecarr, SAR11, oceans' most abundant organism, has been in the news.
I saw the article, strangely no image of possibly the commonest living organism in the world exists on Commons. Since I'm doing a MOOC with UCSD on Climate Change, I thought that a Scripps Institution user could possibly help out.
AshLin (
talk)
16:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited CrossFit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swimming. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2007 CrossFit Games, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pullup. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:12, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Please stop moving the Anthony Davis page. Your undiscussed move was reverted. If you want to move the page, take it to RM. Guettarda ( talk) 04:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
You must STOP edit warring over the question of Anthony Davis and disambiguation. You have been told, over and over, that your preferred person
Anthony Davis (basketball) is not the primary meaning of "Anthony Davis". You have repeatedly requested deletion of the page
Anthony Davis because you want to put the basketball player there, and you have falsely claimed that this deletion would be uncontroversial. You have tried to redirect the page
Anthony Davis to your hero. You are way past the point of
WP:3RR on this matter, and if you do it again, you are likely to be blocked for edit warring. --
MelanieN (
talk)
02:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)