Talk:American Society of Mechanical Engineers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
im a freshman in high school and i am doing a project for my introduction to engineering design and i need to know the basics of how the asme came to be.
Check out [1] (which I should try to merge into the material here). -- Kaszeta 17:17, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
See WP:HD#How does new contrib respond to rejected edits? where a recent anon editor commetned on this article. DES (talk) 20:29, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Would there be any interest in the ASME Performance Test Codes?
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS to move page, per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
American Society of Mechanical Engineers→ ASME – ASME never refers to itself as "American Society of Mechanical Engineers", and on its own "about ASME" it says "Founded in 1880 as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, today's ASME is" [2]. I feel like this article should be called "ASME" rather than the seemingly defunct "American Society of Mechanical Engineers". The new article name of ASME would thus conform better to WP:NCA (like NASA, laser, radar, etc.). --Matthew 22:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
[edit] Survey - Support votes
- support - I nominated it, clearly I support it. --Matthew 22:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Survey - Oppose votes
- Oppose - not "widely known" like that, and there are other uses. -- Beardo 06:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with Beardo, unlike the examples the nom mentions (Nasa, radar, etc), the acronym ASME is not widely known and recognize so the official name should be kept. 205.157.110.11 00:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose on grounds of obscurity per 205.157.110.11 Sumahoy 22:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
Add any additional comments
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit] Member Comments
(Member, out of habit, since 1983) In terms of strengths and weaknesses, ASME has historically done a fairly good job at maintaining standards publications, however when it comes to members, the society has consistently failed to lobby for American mechanical engineers (in terms of limiting foreign immigration and stopping American manufacturing losses markets overseas with horrendous labor and environmental violations), and they provide little of value for the working engineering member on their site. What is most telling, it the fact that there is no open forum on their site for members views. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.107.37.109 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I've moved this comment from the article to the talk page and will respond when I have time. --Athol Mullen 23:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Journal jungle
Doing research into writings produced over several decades, it appears that ASME has published almost as many journals as IEEE. While the standards listed do contribute to the public good, inclusion in the ASME article of a description of its journal output would also so contribute.Rgdboer (talk) 21:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
