User talk:Mion

some of the issues come from articles in dutch.

Mion 13:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==Transparency==

Hi, thanks for helping with Wikipedia. Please do not rename articles from more appropriate titles just so they can be consistant on a disambiguation page. Please read The Manual of Style, the naming conventions, and the Disambiguation Pages Manual of Style for more information. Thanks! Scott Ritchie 01:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for helping with Wikipedia. Please do not rename articles from more appropriate titles just so they can be consistant on a disambiguation page. Please read The Manual of Style, the naming conventions, and the Disambiguation Pages Manual of Style for more information. Thanks! Scott Ritchie 01:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello Scott, I have been reading the styles, (thanks), and it was the only way to get bad interwiki links removed, the EN and NL wiki are now a bit in line, the german one still directs to transparence in optics., still working on it.

Regards, Mion 22:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transparency

Hello Mion. Thanks for you input on Transparency.

I have a few points in answer to your comments:

The page was way off the guidelines laid down in MoS:DP, which was the reason why my edits were so extensive.
You will see that most of my edits actually mentioned MoS:DP, i.e. I have quoted a normative reference. Your reversal of my edits did not mention any normative reference. Please do not revert changes which are clearly made under the auspices of existing guidelines unless you can quote a better normative reference for your position.
You reversed more edits than you actually qualified. Please do not make wholesale changes without qualification.

Please can you make sure you have read and understood MoS:DP before making any further changes to this page?

Thanks, Duckbill 11:31, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you should be sure to have read and understood WP:D as well. Thanks, Duckbill 11:42, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will re-make each change individually, quoting the normative reference for every single change. You should not reverse any of these changes unless you can identify a reason which outweighs my normative references. Thanks, Duckbill 11:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to invite you two to continue your discussion (and others) at Talk:Transparency, so that others can be involved. -- Ravn 11:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

holiday

I.m off for holiday, back around 20-3, so the mediation gets more time. Reg. Mion 12:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Open Travel Alliance template

I've raised some questions at Template talk:OTA, and as I see you created it I hope you'll be able to address some of them. Much appreciated. -choster 03:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

transparency

Talk:Transparency sorry, just back from holiday, mediation is still wanted. could you have a look ? Thanks Mion 14:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-14 Transparent - unsupported reverts by Mion Mion 14:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes gr. Mion 16:33, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes, a revert on transparent (transparency is fine), and links to the other page on each page. Transparent Mion 00:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why das it need a new mediator ? Gr. Mion 22:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been the mediator and I'm no longer available for this mediation case. Your communication was too confused and I have no intention to decode what you were trying to say. Please ask somebody else.

Reply --Fasten 19:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Ok. thanks.Mion 19:09, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

It appears user:Duckbill has not edited since March 30, so I'm not sure if anything can be done about the mediation case at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-14 Transparent - unsupported reverts by Mion, unless there is something I'm missing. If help is still needed, what would you like to be done? Cowman109^Talk 20:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The page transparent is now a redirect. to transparency. revert transparent to its former state, ad a link on it to transparency, same on the page transparency, "for transparent go to". Reg. Mion 14:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quova

Please take a look at the nomination instructions before you nominate another article (or figure out what went wrong last time). Instead of posting your nomination to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quova page, you added it to the end of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Jason Silver. Nothing big, but I thought you should know. BTW, I'm Dutch too. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

De categorie wordt automatisch toegevoegd als je de template gebruikt, maar het is helaas geen vervanging voor de complete procedure (hoewel in sommige gevallen WP:PROD kan worden gebruikt. Het is eigenlijk heel simpel:

Type {{subst:afd}} boven aan het artikel en bewaar.
Volg de link naar de discussie pagina voor de verwijdering van het artikel (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Example_Title)
Noteer je nominatie.
Plaats de link op Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today door {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Example_Title}} aan de lijst toe te voegen (let op de haakjes).

Als je hulp nodig hebt met een nominatie, laat het me weten. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great! See you later.. - Mgm|^(talk) 15:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Cat Sections

Hi , I see you're bizzy with adding proper cat's to hydrogen related and other articles, and removing them from the see also sections. I used to do the same, but, there are people aka the cat cleaners who wil clean out all the categories from the article except 1, naming it tuning the cat. (thats why you see so many See Also links) which will result in no right categories anymore, and the See Also links are also gone. It's just a note, i appreciate your contributions .reg. Mion 21:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note Mion. I think it isn't a good idea for the categories to be cleaned out in the Environment section as there are so many interrelating forces with climate change and man's impacts/technologies. How are people supposed to understand the different issues at stake when Wikipedia may try and box things off too much?--Alex 09:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with you, however cat cleaners can't be stopped, if you don't know the proper name and it isn't mentioned in the article its hard to find the related article. The templates function quite good, i had a look at the hydrogen technology page, a sort of listing, is it the start for a portal ? reg. Mion 11:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on the WikiProject Environment especially environmental technologies. Presently they are quie disjointed and in different vague categories such as Sustainable Technologies and a template that had been badly designed- {{environmental technology}}. Really its just working on these to bring a more logical approach. WikiProject Environment does need a portal although I think this would be beyond my abilities at this stage. Cheers --Alex 11:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but making a listing of fuel cells which are already in the Template:FuelCellGroup, its more simple to make 1 link to the template. For the others links, maybe its better to ad a horizontal line Hydrogen technology in Template:Sustainability and energy development group. This template is already under most of the articles. just an idea.

And Nuclear is not a clean energy. reg. Mion 11:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite relaxed as to the format. Its more the interelations between environmental technologies I am concentrating on. I never claimed Nuclear is a clean energy but some advocate its use in the production of hydrogen. It's a balance between fossil fuel emissions, production of hydrogen using nuclear or ideally production using renewable resources. --Alex 14:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Water fuel cells

I know you are working on the fuel cells category are you aware of this article- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fuel_cell it was not in the fuel cell category.--Alex 13:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar for Work on Fuel Cells and Hydrogen

The Technology Barnstar

Awarded for your continuing work related to hydrogen and fuel cells --Alex 12:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mion, I've been looking Category:Hydrogen and it is expanding well. I suggest it might be useful thinking of subcategorys to group related subjects. --Alex 16:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smartfish translation

Just wanted to tell you that I translated the Smartfish article you requested from German WP. --Greenb 23:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC) Hallo GreenB, thanks for the translation on Smartfish, can you help me out with the other items ? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Hydrogen#Getting_found_articles_translated_into_the_EN_wikipedia. reg Mion 04:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrogen vehicle

Do you agree with the changes made by User:PotomacFever to the Hydrogen vehicle article and other hydrogen-related articles? I am referring to that editor's changing the article to say that burning hydrogen made from fossil fuels creates fewer emmissions (rather than more emissions, which the article said before) than burning the fossil fuels directly. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. --Ssilvers 02:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion ? Talk:Hydrogen_vehicle#Polllution_from_producing_hydrogen:_citation_needed Mion 12:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Under the heading "Research and prototypes" PotomacFever changed the article 180 degrees to read: Current hydrogen production methods utilizing hydrocarbons produce less pollution than would direct consumption of the same hydrocarbon fuel, gasoline, diesel or methane, in a modern internal combustion engine. Hydrogen will generate less CO2 than conventional internal combustion engines if emissions throughout the entire fuel cycle are compared ^[1] ^[2] and thus would contribute less to atmospheric radiative forcing per mile driven.

If you look at the edit history, you can run PF's changes -- Ssilvers 12:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original text: However, current hydrogen production methods utilizing hydrocarbons produce more pollution and cost per mile driven, than would direct consumption of the same hydrocarbon fuel, gasoline, diesel or methane, in a modern internal combustion engine. To reduce pollution and reliance on fossil fuels, sustainable and cost effective methods of hydrogen production and containment would have to be improved beyond current capabilities. The costs of producing, containing, and distributing hydrogen are likely to go up as the costs of fossil fuels goes up from declining supply and increasing demand.Mion 13:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

^ F. Kreith (2004). "Fallacies of a Hydrogen Economy: A Critical Analysis of Hydrogen Production and Utilization". Journal of Energy Resources Technology 126: 249–257.
^ Novelli, P.C., P.M. Lang, K.A. Masarie, D.F. Hurst, R. Myers, and J.W. Elkins. (1999). "Molecular Hydrogen in the troposphere: Global distribution and budget". J. Geophys. Res. 104(30): 427-30.

[1] F. Kreith (2004). "Fallacies of a Hydrogen Economy: A Critical Analysis of Hydrogen Production and Utilization". Journal of Energy Resources Technology 126: 249–257.

[2] Novelli, P.C., P.M. Lang, K.A. Masarie, D.F. Hurst, R. Myers, and J.W. Elkins. (1999). "Molecular Hydrogen in the troposphere: Global distribution and budget". J. Geophys. Res. 104(30): 427-30.

[1]

[2]