User talk:H Padleckas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some select moot discussions have been moved to
User talk:H Padleckas/Archive 1,
User talk:H Padleckas/Archive 2, and
User talk:H Padleckas/Archive 3.

I sent you an email Pckilgore (talk) 04:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Hydantoin

You wouldn't happen to know where I could find out exactly how it's used in industry, or a manufacturing process used in the 21st century? I still have no idea what chemicals the 1911 Britannica is talking about.Rmky87 04:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Wiki for Engineering

Engineering Wiki is a wiki entirely dedicated to collecting information about Engineering. The Engineering Wiki is in early development stages at the moment. We invite you to help develop this wiki.

Thanks for the invitation to join this Engineering Wiki. I just signed up as a member with the same User name. H Padleckas 23:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lithuanian?

Hi, I spotted you on my watch list and I though I could ask you if you would be interested in receiving some news about topics related to Lithuania? Well, your last name looks like you have your roots somewhere there and since you edited Lithuanian cuisine... (I will be horribly embarassed if I am mistaken) See, I have created this Portal:lithuania and try to contribute to Lithuanian articles and gather as many people as possible for the cause. So, can I count you in? (no commitment required) :) Renata3 04:07, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kaunas

Thanks for your contributions on Lithuania! Besides Laisvės alėja, do you know of any streets or squares of Kaunas that are notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia? I can't find any in the lt:Kategorija:Kaunas but I am sure there is one somewhere. TheGrappler 16:30, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Are you perchance a Chemical Engineer?

If you are, would you like to list yourself in the Category:Chemical Engineer Wikipedians that I just created? - mbeychok 04:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am a chemical engineer. I will go look at your list now. I have previously joined Engineering Wiki. H Padleckas 06:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Category:Chemical Engineer Wikipedians was changed to Category:Wikipedian chemical engineers. I am still in it. H Padleckas 07:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jagiello

Would you care to visit at Talk:Wladyslaw_II_Jagiellon_of_Poland#Survey. The simple "Jagiello" - for that there is now a formal listing going on to sign support or opposition. ObRoy 21:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Polish medieval monarchs naming

Hi. I have proposed to move the following monarchs from their current, generally Polish-spelled names (with diacriticals) to the systematical English name, citing my general ground that English should be used, not Polish. Would you share your opinion at Talk:Bolesław I the Brave , Talk:Bolesław II the Bold, Talk:Mieszko II Lambert, Talk:Władysław III Spindleshanks, Talk:Jan I Olbracht and Talk:Kazimierz III the Great. Marrtel 19:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image:Simple chem distillation.PNG

I award you the distillation apparatus of public usefullness Image:Simple chem distillation.PNG (See edit summary for explanation)! 68.39.174.238 15:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll take that to mean I've done something good. Last time I checked, this distillation diagram was being used in Distillation articles in the English, German, Spanish, French, Polish, Lithuanian, Simple English, Catalan, Czech?, Danish, Finnish, and one Cyrillic alphabet language Wikipedias, as well as the Round-bottom flask article in the English and Chinese? Wikipedias, and a Spanish Wikipedia article for "Distillation apparatus". H Padleckas 17:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Hello. I created a baby stub for the article benzethonium chloride.

Free free to jump into the contributions with this benzethonium chloride stub. Good Luck. BenzethoniumChloride 06:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] See my comment on your draft User:H Padleckas/Temp (Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium)

Just want to let you know that I left a brief comment on the Discussion page of your draft User:H Padleckas/Temp (Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium). Regards, mbeychok 04:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Continuous distillation

The last couple of days some strong words have fallen between some chemists and some chemical engineers. As such, nothing that was related to you. The whole thing was frustration build up, which, from my point of view, was that articles were written (or rewritten) in a style which was too difficult for many people to understand (for some, IMHO, the level substantially increased, resulting in chemical engineering subjects being incomprehensible for even chemists). This is still continued in an off-wikipedia discussion, but now what I wanted to ask you. You have been drawing some brilliant pictures for chemical and chemical engineering articles, one of those on the talk page of distillation. I originally requested that picture, for the use in a simple explanation of continuous distillation, but at that point the discussion already got heated, and I decided to back off, and go back to my [mediawiki hacking], and work on chemicals (and do real-life chemistry). I am sorry, I never thanked you for that picture, it is indeed very close to what I wanted to see (and I realise, I can probably not explain what I want as a next step), so, thanks for that picture! The abovementioned discussion has led, that I did a major, total rewrite on continuous distillation (mainly to prove a point: even difficult subjects can be written in a simple way), I have totally re-sorted the article, moved things around, reinstated old parts, and have it now in a level where I think it is a) readable for a wider public (high-school student might be able to get to at least 50% of it, chemists should be able to grasp all but the very last section) and b) still contains all the information that was in the original document. The article can be found in my sandbox. My real question (well, actually, two) to you are: can you check the article, and have a look if it is indeed still consistent and factual correct (I start low, and try to build up the level slowly, I know that results in necessary info to be omitted in the early stages), and b) have a thorough look at image 2, and the accompanying description. The picture is as such sufficient, but if you can improve the picture, with the description in mind, making it more clear that this is a 'laboratory setup being run continuously' that would be great. Hope to hear from you soon, and please, don't be afraid to tell me the rewrite is completely rubbish (I am, in fact, just a chemist), though I hope that you can then also tell me where I go wrong. Also feel free to improve text whereever you can. Cheers! --Dirk Beetstra T C 23:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

(copied here from user talk:beetstra, I think we can keep the discussion in one place) - Thank you for requesting my review/consultation on the Continuous distillation article and for complimenting my drawings. Just in case you did not know, I am both a chemist and a chemical engineer. I have BS and MS degrees in both. I have taken a look at your sandbox rewrite of the Continuous distillation article. I understand your point about including some explanation for a non-technical reader. I would like to edit it to improve the explanations using appropriate chemical engineering terminology, but adding short explanations for the non-technical person where practical. We also have different styles about how to explain things. I think if I spend some time editing this sandbox version, we can reach a version acceptable to most of us. Unfortunately, I'm very busy these days with other things and it will likely take me a while to get to it. I hope you are willing to wait a bit. After all, there are no deadlines in Wikipedia. H Padleckas 04:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. I did know you were both a chemics and a chemical engineer; I see you work on quite some articles in both areas, and therefore, it is not a coincidence that I asked you, especially since you were also involved in drawing the pictures earlier on when the discussion started. My background is chemical, but I have done a 'polytechnic' and a university in the Netherlands which were both 'mixed'. This results in that the first two years of the education on each had a great deal of general chemistry, and we 'chemists' had to study (albeit at that point probably simple) chemical engineering subjects. And I believe, that has done good for my understanding of chemical subjects, understanding scale-up problems when you go from 100 mg to 10 g (I can understand the effect of going another 2 orders of magnitude up, let alone going 5-10 orders of magnitude up). But I am wandering of the path ..
I understand there are differences in ways of explaining, and as such that is OK. I just think that on the borderline of chemistry and chemical engineering (or on whichever borderline), the article should be written from only one point of view. There was a bit of a quarrel earlier on with distillation, where the first things on continuous vs. batch started, and lately it was theoretical plate, where everything went wrong, and some frustrations were expressed. Hence, I am against splitting those articles into two seperate articles (e.g. 'laboratory continuous distillation' and 'industrial continuous distillation'), the principle of the two is the same, and with the current trend of minituralisation the continuous distillation may come into the lab, with very small bubble cap columns. So I am glad to see we have now cooperation between the two fields on that subject, and I hope that continues on other ones as well.
I suggested on that talk page now that we could consider removing the simple, binary system again, that section is a bit difficult at the moment, and the article does not really get that much more difficult when removing the section. It now flows naturally into the more specific parts. But I'd rather wait until you have a go on that section, see if you can rephrase it into something better (it would be nice if batch distillation would get a similar section, with a similar picture, but maybe it does not have to come up in either of them). I can fully understand you are busy, and indeed, there hardly are deadlines on Wikipedia (except when fighting spam and vandalism .. then the only time to act is now). Hope to see you soon! Cheers! --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • * Hi HP!

I noticed on Dirk Beetstra's page,that you intend to do some work on Continuous Distillation. My background is a bit similar to yours, but I am retired and have a bit more time on my hands. So far I have only poked my fingers into the Organic chemistry page, which still requires some work.

However, Wiki has highlighted Distillation as being a subject of actuality, a subject in which I am also intersted, and on reading the article on distillation I noticed that, though the statements seem accurate enough the artcle is too extensive: it should really be a portal, with lots of things removed elsewhere and just being referred to it on the Distillation page. Since my reading the article this might have been done to an extent, I don't know.

I agree with Dirk's view that the Continuous distillation article also needs a major overhaul, and as you do seem very busy, I shall have a bash at it in the near future. It might make your job a bit easier when you'll find the time (or might make it more difficult) We'll see. All the best LouisBB 14:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image for a 3-necked continuous distillation flask for Beetstra

Hi, Henry, we haven't communicated in a few days. I hope all is well with you. In regard to that 3-necked flask for Beetstra to use somehow to explain continuous distillation is, in my opinion, probably useless. It would be an "imaginary" piece of labware because there is probably no such device in existence. I am sure that you realize that. In any event, the draft that Beetsra and I collaborated on has now been moved into the main namespace ... and there are new problems to worry about.

I finished the merged Hydrodesulfurizer article and moved it into the main namespace as well. Sometimes it seems as if there is a never-ending stream of new articles that are needed. I think that I will next get started on a very schematic flow diagram of an entire modern-day refinery with even less detail than the flow diagram I made of a hydrodesulfurizer ... otherwise it will never fit on a Wikipedia page. Best wishes for the upcoming holiday season! - mbeychok 01:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page move debate opinions needed

Hi, user DIV (a chemical engineer), i.e. User talk:128.250.204.118, and myself (a chemical engineer) have been debating over the name of the Gibbs free energy article for seven months now. DIV is demanding that both the Gibbs free energy and Helmholtz free energy articles be moved to “Gibbs energy” and “Helmholtz energy” per IUPAC definitions, and is continuously rewriting all the related articles in Wikipedia on this view. According to my opinion, as well as others, e.g. 2002 encyclopedia Britannica, 2006 encyclopedia Encarta, 2004 Oxford Dictionary of Chemistry, 2005 Barnes & Noble’s The Essential Dictionary of Science, the 2004 McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Chemistry, Eric Weissteins World of Physics: Gibbs Free Energy, etc., Gibbs free energy and Helmholtz free energy are the most common usages. If you have an opinion on this issue could you please comment here. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 19:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What do you think of Natural gas processing?

Hi, Henry:

What do you think of the latest article I wrote on Natural gas processing? I would really like to know. I just had a birthday and I must be getting old, because I can't remember if I wished you a Happy New Year ... so, just to be sure, Happy New Year! - mbeychok 03:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Lot (real estate)

Yeah, section headings would be good, especially a reference/notes section. - Ozzykhan 18:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Untagged images at Wikibooks

Currently we are removing untagged images at Wikibooks. While working on replacing or properly tagging these specific media, I noticed that many of your images uploaded before Special:Log superseded b:Wikibooks:Upload log are untagged. I created a list of all those images at a sub-page in my userspace. I cannot expect that you tag them each individually; there are too many of them. You may, however, contact an administrator at Wikibooks, particularly b:User:Herbythyme or b:User:Whiteknight, who have said they are willing to tag images en masse if users come to them.

I would be very appreciative if you would be able to do this. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message here. I will watch your page. And, again, thank you very much for your support. I look forward to seeing your images remain on Wikibooks. Cheers, Iamunknown 08:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I will take care of this when I get a chance; so don't delete the images.
H Padleckas 18:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe I have taken care of this problem for all my Wikibooks images. If you find any of my Wikibooks images still untagged, let me know. H Padleckas 03:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Analysers

Thank you for mentionning your work on this. I regret that I cannot give you an up to date view on this, which is what is really required. What you wrote, to me, seems just fine. With regards to the last paragraph are you certain that none of the instruments should be mentioned there ? I thought several of them are discussed under the subject of Instrumental Analysis in Analytical Chemistry. E.g. similarly to the instruments mentionned here Conductometric or Potentiometric titration do not give complete chemical analysis of the sample, they only analyse a single aspect. Worth checking out if the analyser name could not be implied. There is just one more thing I would add to the article: the fact that the results of continuous analysers can be used for direct continuous process control, i.e. for process automation by setting control valve(s) for instance. I have not checked if an article on process control exists or not, but the two subjects are well connected, and some reference might be made to this. It might be an idea to separate the analysers used in the chemical industry from the others by a disambiguation page. What is written is nicely written. Cheers, LouisBB 21:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] HEPP

its mean is Hydro Electric Power Plant

ozyurekli

[edit] Please visit Talk:Pollution control and comment on my proposal to merge it into the Pollution article

Henry, I would very much appreciate your visiting Talk:Pollution control and commenting on my proposal to merge Pollution control into the existing Pollution article.

Pollution control only has one brief paragraph of lead-in, a number of section headers and a multitude of internal Wiki links ... but no real content of any kind. I tried to get it deleted but an administrator decided that a bunch of clean-up tags would be better. In effect, he is simply trying to persuade people to take an empty shell and write another article. In my opinion, the Pollution control shell or stub is completely useless and unneeded since we have so many other articles such as Pollution, Air pollution, Water pollution and many, many solid waste articles. Wiki also has Category:Pollution, Category:Air pollution, and Category:Water pollution. Another article is just not needed.

Therefore, I proposed to merge Pollution control into the existing Pollution article.

Sorry to be so long-winded. Please add your comments to Talk:Pollution control. Regards, -mbeychok 18:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note my response to your comment on Talk:Thermal power station

Please note my response on above Talk page. Best regards, - mbeychok 20:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Acid Titration.PNG requires attention

Hello. An image you had previously uploaded, Image:Acid Titration.PNG, did not have a licensing tag. Another editor has tagged the image as {{GFDL-presumed}}. You may wish to visit the image page and provide the correct license. You can view a list of all the image licensing tags at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/All. The image risks being nominated for deletion as failing to have a license. Many of these {{GFDL-presumed}} image are used on User pages. --User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

GFDL-presumed tag changed to GFDL in the pic page. H Padleckas 15:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ChE timeline

Please contribute to this new timeline section I just started, if you can. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 15:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replacement pic for Image:P2080.JPG

This talk section is copied from G®iffen's talk page

Thank you for improving an article I recently started in the English Wikipedia called Cabin (truck) by inserting three pictures of trucks. In the article Semi-trailer truck which you have also edited in the past, the first picture in the article called Image:P2080.JPG, a rather nice image showing a semi-trailer truck, is slated for deletion. Please see comments on its Talk page: Image talk:P2080.JPG and see if you can find a nice-looking replacement for this introductory picture. H Padleckas 23:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

It's holiday season, so it might take a few days, but I'll se what I can do about it. G®iffen 22:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I've found a suggestion, I'd like to hear an opinion... G®iffen 12:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Cold Trap.PNG

Hi there

I was wondering if there is a slight error in your image. Shouldn't the gas come down the walls, and out of the tube into the vacuum pump? Instead of coming down the tube and past the walls, into the vacuum pump? In my experience, having the gas come down the tube first is a sure-fire way to get it plugged with ice and other frozen solvents. --Rifleman 82 08:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I suppose you are contending that the labels "vacuum line" and "vacuum pump" for the two tubular openings should be switched and both associated arrows be shown going in directions reverse to what they are now. Upon reading your comment above, I looked at the corresponding German article de:Kühlfalle which has an approximately analogous picture. In this picture used by the German article, the top tubular opening has an extra 90° bend, the position of the side opening is on the left instead of the right side like my pic, and there seems to be no ground glass disconnection joint for opening up the cold trap as shown in my pic, but these are relatively minor differences. However in the German pic, the directions of the arrows at the two tubular openings (with respect to the internal tube) are consistent with my pic. There is also a pic in the corresponding Polish article, but it is not clear from the pic what the tubular openings are connected to. I may investigate this further when I have more time. H Padleckas 09:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I mean. The arrows should be switched in my opinion and experience. Thanks for looking into it. --Rifleman 82 10:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Take a look at draft of new article on "Relative volatility" in my sandbox

Hello, Henry:

If you have 20-30 minutes to spare, please take a look at the draft of a new article to be entitled "Relative volatility" in my sandbox ... and feel free to comment or make edits. It is at User:Mbeychok/MRB's sandbox. Thanks and regards, - mbeychok 06:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boiling point article

Milt, Are you going to work on the Boiling point article? If so, I will leave it alone for the near future. If not, I may take a look at it. I was thinking similar things as you when I read it before, but I did not have time then to fix anything. H Padleckas 22:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Henry, please do work on it. I've got too much on my plate at this time. That article really needs a complete work-over! The more I see articles like that one (and there are many), the more discouraging it is. That's why I finally "boiled over" on the article's Talk page. - mbeychok 23:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Despite what I said (just above) about not having time to work on Boiling point ... the more I worked on Vapor pressure, Partial pressure, Volatility (chemistry) and other related articles, the more I realized how badly a Wiki link to Boiling point was misleading readers. So I took enough time to roughly rewrite the first two sections of Boiling point ... not as well as I would have liked to, but enough so that at least it is technically correct in my opinion. If you have time to go over it in your usual thorough manner and polish it or revise it, please do!
I also created Normal boiling point, Atmospheric boiling point and Atmospheric pressure boiling point, all as re-directs to Boiling point. Regards, Milt - mbeychok 23:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Surgery

Thanks for your expansion of surgery, which was indeed in urgent need of improvement. The article is a bit low on sources. I'll see if I can get some useful citations from Roy Porter's Cambridge History of Medicine. JFW | T@lk 08:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Review/Content

Stripping (chemistry) Hello H Padleckas, I was wondering if you could review this article to see if you think it has any mistakes or needs more content. If you think that more content is needed feel free to add more as it seems like you have some knowledge in the field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iowaskier (talk • contribs) 02:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for asking for my review (opinion) of the Stripping (chemistry) article. By the way, I made the Image:Bubble Cap Trays.PNG diagram currently appearing in that article. I have read the article and I'm still thinking about it. Maybe I will edit it or write up some commentary on it later. H Padleckas (talk) 09:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sailfish.JPG

I left a message for you over at commons, but you probably don't check in there very often... :)

One of your pics in commons has the old outdated license in place. You have changed most of them, but not this one... Horologium (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I did not find your message on my Talk page at WikiCommons. Perhaps you did not leave me a message there. However, I have taken care of this Sailfish.JPG image and other WikiCommons images of mine in a similar situation. H Padleckas (talk) 18:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Oops. That's because I'm an idiot and left it on your user page, not the talk page. :\ Sorry about that. Horologium (talk) 00:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)