User talk:Kbk
Hi Kbk, Welcome to wikipedia! Monkeyman 23:00, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
NSA authorization and previous administration
[edit]Unless you'd like to cite authority to suggest previous administrations have done the same thing, I'm going to again revert this assertion. It appears to be the creation of a talking point by those in defense of the administration, and appears to be patently wrong. Carter and Clinton, via executive order, permitted the Attorney General to exercise their authority under sub(a) subject to the procedural guarantees.[1] and [2]. There's nothing inconsistent with FISA. mmmbeerT / C / ? 18:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
HF, re your message to Smokefoot
[edit]This is a healthy discussion, and I am glad you raised the points. Here's my response: If WE attempted to provide advice on potential chemical mishaps by the likes of carwash attendants, we might as well give up now because there is no hope. I also think that it is unfair to imply that the current article on hydrofluoric acid is merely a collection of links. Yes, the safety bits usually are a collection of links because the editors appreciate (i) we are to avoid offering advice (notice that the chemistry discussion is explanatory, offers ZERO advice and NO opinions) and (ii) it is impossible to foresee all the ill-advised activities possible with every chemical.
Experience shows that virtually every chemical can be insidious, especially in the hands of someone unprepared, stupid, or uninformed (which often, unfortunately includes the low-paid workers, like your carwash attendents). But Wikipedia is not the Whole Earth Catalogue of do-gooderness (I realize that I am being sarcastic slightly here).
About your .com link that I objected to, you might have a point. But since we are trading stories, I have worked with lots of HF and never ever heard of cardiac anything. I guess if you breath the stuff all day, you might have a problem, but doesn't common sense dictate that one breaths air and only air? Go ahead and reintroduce the parts that you feel are relevant. And accept my apologies.
By the way, I am really glad that you are editing because we have relatively few techie editors in this space.--Smokefoot (talk) 01:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Glenn Curtiss
[edit]You added the words "The air-cooled L-head engine was intended for use in aircraft." to this article. Why do you believe this is true? Do you have a source for this?GroveGuy (talk) 03:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I spoke before I looked. Indeed, it says this in House. I will add a reference. GroveGuy (talk) 04:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
My reference was motorcycle.com. The article has some nice images. It also says that it's an F-head. I changed that to L-head because I didn't see any sign of an overhead valve mechanism. But on re-reading more closely, it appears that the inlet is a poppet valve and may in fact open downwards. Feel free to make the change! I've got to get a look at the reproduction in the Hammondsport museum!Kbk (talk) 04:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
You have to be careful with references. There are several errors in that 2004 article. He absolutely had no connection with the Wright brothers. He never claimed inventing the handlebar throttle control. Some feel this is wrongly attributed to him. While the original airplane construction occurred in Hammondsport, he quickly built factories in Buffalo as soon as big orders arrived. Hammondsport was a small town with few workers. Anyway, glad to see someone else with an interest in Curtiss. GroveGuy (talk) 06:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
That article is a mess, that's why I didn't reference it :-). I also reviewed info at the museum website. But the pictures didn't lie, and I now have a good reference to F-head at the Smithsonian (in the "more information" at that link). Note that the throttles are just levers on the carbs that he could reach down and flick off at the end of the run. Check out the amazing high-res image!Kbk (talk) 06:33, 6 December 2010 (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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)