User talk:Beagel/archive2008

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Future Energy Worldwide energy consumption and production

you wrote in feb. 2007 "World Energy Outlook consists some forecasts of energy consumption up to 2030. Unfortunately this is not available via Internet and I don't have the printed book." I need energy forecast projections for citations in Kardashev scale. I've found some projections by International Energy; Agency^[1] the only problem is that they measured it all in btu's.... sigh. So I was wondering if you found an alternative source for energy predictions.--Sparkygravity (talk) 22:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

So basically the "World Energy Outlook 2005" is under GFDL copyrights?--Sparkygravity (talk) 13:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Well like you said the IEA makes documents free and publicly available after two years... so I know it's under a public license. But certain copyrights exclude users from the right to be copy material in any form. So I was wondering if you knew what copyright license it would most likely be under? I don't want future tables and figures deleted from Kardashev scale due to copyright infrigement--Sparkygravity (talk) 14:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, the last stipulation basically translates that any user who cites the IEA as publisher and respects copyright terms and conditions may use information by linking to article. So I think we're good... Thanks for the help.--Sparkygravity (talk) 15:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nord Stream logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nord Stream logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nordic Energy Link logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nordic Energy Link logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Atomenergoprom

I added source in Atomenergoprom, but i dont know how to put it right. can u improve it please? Secondly, A law adopted by the Russian parliament and signed by the Russian President transformed the status of Federal Atomic Energy Agency from Federal Agency to state owned company called Rosatom. Please change the Article's name to Rosatom. thanks Superzohar Talk 16:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wind Farms

Hello Beagle

Why? do you keep removing catagoreys from some of the pages I have worked on when they are relevant to the subject in question. Please do not remove them again(Polite Request) Stavros1 (talk) 22:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your GA nomination of Three Gorges Dam

The article Three Gorges Dam you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Three Gorges Dam for things needed to be addressed. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your help with this nomination! It's the first that I've done one, so I'm sure to get a few things wrong. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Promoted

The article has reached GA status, and I have added it to the GA list. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Better References

About The three gorges dam, there are tons of references in the article. Many of them are out of date or not telling the truth. Even they are from CNN or Ruters. I cannot guarantee that all the information released by the Chinese offical is unbiased,but I think they are reliable.　I will try to find more reference for this, but maybe only restricted to something about power generation.Calvingao (talk) 23:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coal power in China

Hey, thanks for your hard work as always! You previously added a section to the article Coal power in China about a planned carbon capture and storage plant. I agonized about this for a bit, but it seems clear now that that's the same plant as the IGCC that I put some stuff in before.

My confusion steams from a few things. Firstly, IGCC does not directly imply CCS, right? Also, are there any CCS coal plants in existence? And I don't know, it just seems strange that they would make a CCS plant when they have thousands out there with age-old technology not even equipped with desulfurization. Anyway, I'm not 100% sure on any of this, so I wanted to run it by you first. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your copyedit request

On 15 September 2007, you made a request to the League of Copyeditors for a copyedit on Oil shale geology, Oil shale reserves, Oil shale industry, Oil shale economics, History of the oil shale industry, and Environmental effects of oil shale industry. Because of a heavy backlog and a shortage of copyeditors, we have been unable to act on your requests in a timely manner, for which we apologize. Since your requests, these articles may have been subject to significant editing and may no longer be good candidates for copyediting by the League. If you still wish the League to copyedit these articles, please review them article against our new criteria and follow the instructions on the Requests page. This will include your requests in our new system, where they should receive more prompt attention. Finetooth (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of SeWave

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on SeWave, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because SeWave seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting SeWave, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 21:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eesti Energia logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Eesti Energia logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eesti Põlevkivi logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Eesti Põlevkivi logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:KazMunayGas logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:KazMunayGas logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

[edit] Yemen Liquified Natural Gas Project

I have proposed that Yemen LNG be merged into Economy of Yemen. Since this article has insufficient content, context or reliable secondary sources to demonstrate notability, I feel that it would be best in the interest of preserving what little content there is. Would you be willing to support or assist with this task? --Gavin Collins (talk) 14:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

Hi Beagel... I've added WikiProject Energy templates to some articles today, but have left the importance parameter free as I thought you may like to fill this in. Hope this is OK... Johnfos (talk) 11:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I made some assessments. However, you are free to re-assess any article if you disagree with current assessment.Beagel (talk) 19:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peak uranium

Beagel, I would like to invite you to take a quick look at the article for a quick read through. I have identified a few places that need to be improved in the to-do box. However, I'm looking for a few things that need to be cleaned up. Also, the article has been marked with an NPOV flag. Could you please point out the areas that need to be balanced in this article.Kgrr (talk) 16:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Beagel, thanks for your comments and advice. It gives me some other things to do to finish the project before I move on to doing another one. BTW, I need someone impartial to take a look at Nuclear power (with a little more clout than I have) It seems to be written in a complete pro-nuclear POV and needs some serious balancing.Kgrr (talk) 21:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Beagel, it's good to hear from you and thanks for your advice. I will give him a ring. BTW, your advice on peak uranium is working for me. It's helping shape the article and helping it flow. Kgrr (talk) 04:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nuclear energy policy

Hi Beagel, and thanks for your suggestion. Most of the nuclear phaseout material I've seen is quite fuzzy, and lacking in specifics. But I will keep my eyes open and, as things become clearer, hope to make some improvements where I can... Johnfos (talk) 01:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		An overdue token of appreciation for all the good work you do in maintaining WP:Energy and the Energy Portal. Johnfos (talk) 00:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Beagel (talk) 17:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of LEO LT

A tag has been placed on LEO LT requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 19:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LEO LT

Thank you for your notification. Actually the article was deleted even before I finished fixing typos and I didn't had a time to response. But I think that you were wrong about A7. It was explained in the article why this company is significant to have its own article. Maybe it needed better explanation, but really not the case of A7. Beagel (talk) 20:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Haha, your right, the administrators are really fast around here. This was one of those cases where it was questionable if it should, or should not be tagged. However, since i am merely tagging the article, i tend to be quite trigger happy when tagging, since its better to have a tag declined by an admin, then allowing a questionable page to pass trough. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 20:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Two articles

Hope you can give me a second opinion on two articles please. Domestic AC power plugs and sockets and Nuclear fusion are both A class but both are quite poorly referenced. I think they should be demoted to B class, but thought I would check with you first... Johnfos (talk) 22:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The main issue is a lack of references. I put some requests to fix this. Lets wait one week and if there is no progress to improve these articles, you may go forward with downgrading.Beagel (talk) 08:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lithuanian Electricity Organization

On 28 February 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lithuanian Electricity Organization, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)