imported>Mary Ash |
imported>Pat Palmer |
| (12 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Archive box|auto=long|box-width=30em}} | | {{Archive box|auto=long|box-width=30em}} |
| {{Usertime-text|Milt}}{{Template:Utc|-8 }}<br><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR> | | {{Usertime-text|Milt}}{{Template:Utc|-8 }}<br><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR> |
| | ==Milt== |
| | Milt was a great contributor to our project who invested a lot of his own knowledge and time in it; Citizendium is much poorer without him. He was highly trusted and respected, previously serving as the project's Treasurer and on the elected Management and Editorial Councils. However, we were a small part of a long life: Milt completed his degree in 1944, but his graduation was delayed while he saw action in Europe during the Second World War. Decades of experience in both chemical and environmental engineering followed, and he would become a well-published authority on various aspects of these fields, as recognized by his Fellowship of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers. His daughter also tells me he liked to apply his engineering approach to everyday life by collecting recipes and carefully replicating dishes he'd enjoyed. Milt stood firm against pseudoscience and other nonsense, as we at Citizendium can attest, and was a strong proponent of the science and the facts. I am sure I speak for those who knew him here when I say that we will miss him. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] ([[User talk:John Stephenson|talk]]) 12:27, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
| | :RIP Milt. He was a nice gent. [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] ([[User talk:Ro Thorpe|talk]]) 14:04, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
| | :RIP Milt. [[User:JeromeDelacroix|Jérôme Delacroix]] ([[User talk:JeromeDelacroix|talk]]) 18:22, 28 February 2015 (UTC+1) |
| | :RIP Milt. You embodied the true spirit of Citizendium at its best.[[User:Roger A. Lohmann|Roger A. Lohmann]] ([[User talk:Roger A. Lohmann|talk]]) 04:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC) |
| | :RIP MIlt. As a collaborator and colleague, he will be missed. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] ([[User talk:Russell D. Jones|talk]]) 16:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ==Write-a-Thon==
| | Milt had an abundance of wisdom, passion and knowledge. He was with Citizendium from the early days, and embraced fully the spirit and idealism with which Citizendium was launched. He made an enormous contribution to the project. [[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] ([[User talk:Gareth Leng|talk]]) 21:07, 1 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| Hi Milt:
| | I have missed Milt ever since he needed to leave the project, and I will always remember him fondly.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] ([[User talk:Pat Palmer|talk]]) 01:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| I will not be available for the Writeathon, but I think [[Venn diagram]] is a great candidate article because it is such a generally used idea. It can be supplemented with examples and the history of the concept. Maybe you could be persuaded to sponsor it in my absence? [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 17:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
| | == Milt's productivity as chemical engineer == |
|
| |
|
| :Done. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 21:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
| | Let us temper our sadness in the passing of our esteemed colleague with a celebration of his achievements in his field of endeavor. Google Scholar has tabulated 111 articles he published between 1951 and 2005, with links to them and to all the articles that cited them. |
|
| |
|
| == Officially thanking Milt == | | See: [https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=kBHMSC4AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra MR Beychok] |
|
| |
|
| Hi, Milt -- the Editorial Board would like to officially thank you for all the effort and expertise that you put into your job as Editorial Personnel Manager. The EC motion about this is at http://ec.citizendium.org/wiki/EC:2011-034, and if you check the Recent Changes in the Forum you will find two entries about this, as well as the official notice on the EC page of the CZ wiki.
| | [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] ([[User talk:Anthony.Sebastian|talk]]) 22:22, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
| | |
| Once again, many thanks! The Secretary of the Editorial Council, [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 14:52, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Me, too, Milt. I'd like to thank you as well. You've done a yeoman's job and I miss you already! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 00:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Thanks indeed, Milt, and also for your serving as treasurer. I hope this gives you some more time to concentrate on writing fine articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :::Warmest thanks Milt; you've done a great job.[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 10:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == File:Montage2.jpg ==
| |
| | |
| If you are unsure of Johns intentions in correctly identifying copyright abuse on this site, then ask him (rather than undoing his edits without discussion). This is a ''wiki'' you know. [[User:David Finn|David Finn]] 08:43, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :David, I am not a Biology editor nor am I a copyright lawyer. I am at a complete loss as to why you asked me to look into this matter. As for your statement of: "then ask him (rather than undoing his edits without discussion)", I find that quite offensive. Have you nothing better to do with your time? [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
| |
| ::Come on guys, I know tensions are high, but let's be nice, please? [[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 15:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Stood ==
| |
| | |
| Thanks for having corrected my horrible mistake in [[Roman alphabet]].--[[User:Domergue Sumien|Domergue Sumien]] 11:06, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == EPA ==
| |
| | |
| Hi Milt, I'ver removed your name from the EPA list. Hopefully, that will take care of it. Thanks for carrying us through the last couple tough years. We couldn't have done it without you! Take care of that back and your wife and I hope that returning to editing is a more stress relieving experience for you. If not, let me know! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 00:36, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Some questions about the upcoming elections ==
| |
| | |
| Milt, I've replied on my talk page. Regards, [[User:Anton Sweeney|Anton Sweeney]] 19:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == [[ASIMO]] approval ==
| |
| | |
| Hello Mr. Milton Beychok. Could you take a look at the article on [[ASIMO]] and see if it is fit for approval? I think some things could be rewritten in the latter sections about the New ASIMO and the All-new ASIMO . ([[User:Chunbum Park|Chunbum Park]] 02:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC))
| |
| | |
| ::Hi, Chunbum: I have briefly read the [[ASIMO]] article which is in the Robotics Workgroup and it strikes me as being exceedingly well written. I want to commend you for having produced such a very well written article.
| |
| | |
| ::I have also read our new Approvals Process (Regulation EC:R-2011-027) at [http://ec.citizendium.org/wiki/EC:R-2011-027 here] and I am confused as to whether or not I can start the Approval process. That new regulation states '''"<u>Any</u> Editor or Approval Manager may start the Approval process for an article."''' For example, does that mean that an Editor in the Agriculture Workgroup or the Linguistics Workgroup can start the Approval of an article in the Robotics Workgroup? That does not strike me as logical.
| |
| | |
| ::I am an Editor in the Engineering Workgroup and the Chemistry Workgroup ... but I am not an Editor in the Robotics Workgroup. Nor am I an expert in robotics. So I am not sure that I am entitled to start the Approval of an article in the Robotics Workgroup.
| |
| | |
| ::I think you should take this up with our Approvals Manager, [[User talk:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] ... and let me know what he says. Happy Holidays!! [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 04:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)e
| |
| | |
| ::: I have started the process with a Call for review, as Chumbum could have done himself. Any Editor can accept this call if he thinks that the article is worth a thorough review. (I'll do this.) Then any Editor (with sufficient competence, but independent of Workgroup) can put his report (evaluating the article, or parts of the article) on the Approval subpage. Chumbum may add his report. Then Joe has to judge if these reports justify approval or not. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
| |
| ::: If you want to make a comment go to [[ASIMO/Approval]]. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == New member ==
| |
| | |
| Hi Milt, I thought you might like to greet [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Alan_A._Mick this new member]. He looks promising for an engineering editor of at least a specialist. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 00:06, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Featured article [[Volatility (chemistry)]] ==
| |
| | |
| Milt, Congratulations on a front page featured article [[Volatility (chemistry)]]. I hope you're holding out OK these days. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 21:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == [[Boiling point/Draft]] ==
| |
| | |
| Milt, since you're one of the main writers of the [[Boiling point/Draft]] page, I must say that I expanded this page by adding two more sections, before it went through re-approval. I still would like to expand it a little further, including mentioning azeotropes and adding a new section on experimental "Boiling point determination" in a lab setting, which I have yet to write or even research. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 00:23, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Thanks, Henry. I agree that a section on "Boiling point determination" in a laboratory setting would be useful. However, I think that azeotropes deserve a separate, stand-alone article. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Approval for [[ASIMO]] ==
| |
| | |
| Milton, since you had reviewed favorably [[ASIMO]] for approval, I took the liberty of including your name as supporting approval. I added Engineering and Computers as Categories for the article.
| |
| | |
| Any thoughts as to who to approach for additional reviewers/potential-supporters? [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 22:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Tony, if we have any active computer authors or editors, I would suggest contacting them. Other than that, I have no ideas. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 23:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == [[Boiling point/Draft]] certified for approval, at last ==
| |
| | |
| Milton, I requested Matt replace the current Main Article.
| |
| | |
| Thank you for your patience.
| |
| | |
| Let me know what other of the articles you are main contributor you would like to have the approval process started.
| |
| | |
| —[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 20:13, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Many thanks, Tony. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 06:20, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::I added the final diagram and notified A. Sebastian on his Talk page. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 09:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Boiling point/Draft--Diagram ==
| |
| | |
| Milton, are you okay with updating the version for protection, re diagram changes by Henry A.? It does not have to be updated. Henry can continue working on the new draft. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 02:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Tony, I am perfectly okay with Henry's diagram. Last night, I said that I was in agreement with including it in the current re-approval (see the "Approval mechanics" section of [[Talk:Boiling point/Draft]]) and I urged him to contact you as soon as he could, which he did. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 03:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Milt, Congratulations on [[Boiling point]] being re-approved and moved to the approved article mainspace. :-D In the meantime, I have written a new article for both WP and CZ called [[Missile vehicle]] here, but when I almost finished writing an explanation on the CZ Talk page, my Google Chrome window inexplicably disappeared, and I seemed to have lost that discussion. :-( I'll try rewriting again later when I have time. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 03:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| :::Rewritten. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 09:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == [[Missile vehicle]] ==
| |
| Milt, thank you for reviewing the [[Missile vehicle]] Metadata form and for uploading the latest Patriot missile image to CZ from WikiCommons. I <s>think I will substitute</s> ''substituted'' it for the present pic since it shows the vehicle better. It's my understanding that to transfer an image from WikiCommons to CZ, I first have to download it from WikiCommons to my personal computer memory, then to upload it back from my personal computer memory to CZ and "manually" transfer author's data/license to CZ. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 09:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :That is the correct procedure, except I'm not sure what you mean by "manual" transfer of license. You merely select the same license as on WP (or as close to the same as possible) from the CZ upload Wizard. Also, don't forget to create the credit line. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 15:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Milt, you can see my response to [[User talk:Henry A. Padleckas#Another TOPOL-M photo]] if you wish. Also, nice job on the new [[BTX]] articles in CZ and WP. [[User:Henry A. Padleckas|Henry A. Padleckas]] 16:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Would you want to initiate Approval Process or [[Air Resources Laboratory]] ==
| |
| | |
| Milton, [[CZ:Ready for approval]] lists [[Air Resources Laboratory]]. Let me know if and when you would like to initiate the Approval Process for that article.
| |
| | |
| I find article nicely organized and lucidly written. I liked the history section, and I would enjoy and learn more about our government's service in attending to air quality matters, the historical motivators raising air quality concerns by the government, the budget limit and how that compares to that of other government programs.
| |
| | |
| Random Thoughts
| |
| | |
| It's been two years since you last edited the article. Has the infrastructure (agencies and agency-relationship) changed at all during that period?
| |
| | |
| How does EPA work with ARL and/or NOAA? Does adding that information in any way help to enhance the article?
| |
| | |
| I noted that refs 2,3,4,6 require of the reader two or more steps to access the specified source; giving the specific source url should think would make it more efficient for the reader/student to get to the specific source cited, if they wanted to.
| |
| | |
| Writing about government agencies opens the writer to the opportunity for including many public-domain images. Personally I like to see the measuring apparatuses, how they analyze the data, controversies, how and how much do they report to the public. Could stand alone as an article, perhaps one among a named topic series: The Quality of Our Air. Say.
| |
| | |
| However you want to proceed, I am at your service in my capacity as Approval Manager, or if need be, as EC member. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 22:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Tony, please excuse my delay in replying to you. When I specified the status of the subject article as 1, I meant that I thought it was as completely developed as I was capable of making it so. However, I don't think the article should be considered for approval ... it just isn't that notable in my opinion.
| |
| | |
| :Also, the website of NOAA's [[Air Resources Laboratory]] seem to have been revised extensively in the past few years ... that's why some of the references are no longer direct. I will fix that in the next few days. I will also update the article by re-writing parts of it. However, even after I have done those things, I still would not like to have the article considered for approval because I don't think it warrants that. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 17:15, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Thanks for that explanation, Milton. I will remove the title from [[CZ:Ready for approval]], and you can replace it there whenever.
| |
| | |
| ::Speaking of the items listed in [[CZ:Ready for approval]], are there any there (or not listed there) that you would want to start the Approval Process, remembering the process begins with only a 'call for review'. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 21:42, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==Thanks Milt for the Armstrong edits==
| |
| Thanks so much for helping out with the Armstrong article. [[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 04:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
| |
Where Milt lives it is approximately: 18:39