Siafu, Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Engineering Wiki. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Community Portal talk page or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- User:Srini 10:39, 15 Oct 2005 (IST)

And a welcome from me too. Thanks for being the first to use my talk page.

Category:Applied sciences can hold a number of things: first, any other category that belongs in it; second: a list of applied sciences (not all of which relate to engineering; but you proper engineers can decide).

Wikipedia's category (which we may as well adopt unless there's a very good reason not to) is a portal, which contains:

  • Computers and Electronics
  • Computing
  • Electronics
  • Communications
  • Internet
  • Other sub-categories
  • Agriculture
  • Architecture
  • Engineering
  • Education
  • Manufacturing
  • Medicine
  • Nuclear technology
  • Optics
  • Plumbing
  • Telecommunications
  • Tools
  • Transportation
  • Vehicles
  • Technology timelines
  • Invention timeline
  • Interdisciplinary articles
  • Agriculture
  • Commerce
  • Industry
  • Materials science
  • Medicine
  • War and military science, ODP, and Google don't have a specific overall category with the same name (or with the singular).

I could ask what you plan to do with the Category:science that you created! But it has been useful at least three times already.

Kind regards

Robin Patterson 08:33, 7 Nov 2005 (UTC)


I find that you have copied the said article from Wiki. If I am right, please tell me how you got the photos also tranferred. The edit for this article shows that the wordings are same as in Wiki. I am trying some sketches but is is not showing in Wiki eng. Is it necessary to upload the photos/sketches also in this Wiki eng?

--Dore chakravarty 05:42, 20 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I deleted Category:Astronomy by mistake. I have Undeleted it. So, u can contniue using it. Sorry for the delay. Srini

Boiler explosion[]

Thanks for the improvements. You can also see these please.

The following may not be correct technically. particularly those of steam engines.

The second one is a minor one [failure mode|failure]]s of of. One ofto be deleted.

--Dore chakravarty 18:40, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Copying from Wiki[]

Thanks for the guidance. I shall try to understand and act.

--Dore chakravarty 18:45, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Boiler explosion[]

Can you not think of correcting this Boiler explosions are catastrophic failures of boilers, particularly those of steam engines. The original article was with respect to Locomotive boilers and now the present one is of general type covering all types of boilers. Hence the above sentence may not be appropriate. Please think once again.

--Dore chakravarty 19:30, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Siafu's comment (on Dore's page) about the article called "boiler explosions" being NOT restricted to locomotives. One thinks of an old song "Steamboat Bill" in which a Mississippi steamboat was pushed beyond its limit and "the boiler it exploded, blew them up in the air". (Bill's widow was possibly looking for trouble when she said to their children "Bless each honey lamb; the next Papa you have will be a railroad man.")
Anything really specific to locos should be considered for a new page (if the current page is too long), eg Locomotive boiler explosions, linked from the current page.
I'm still hoping that Siafu will make a proper sentence out of "Locomotive boilers that are of a construction with a very small hand-fed furnace (a fire tube boiler), the latter type of explosion from the furnace side is practically unheard of." - I had "being" as the third word; but it was changed to "that are" - it's not a proper sentence now.
Robin Patterson 05:06, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Boiler explosion[]

Please refer to paragraph on Furnace explosions in article Thermal_power_station for some details on explosion on land based big size boilers. This may give you some idea on the above subject for you to enable further thinking.

--Dore chakravarty 07:04, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Boiler explosion[]

Boiler explosions are catastrophic failures of boilers, particularly those of steam engines.

The above sentence as I understand refers to explosions of steam engines. Were there explosions of steam engines in early days? If so which part of steam engine got burst? This user may be aware of some details on this which I have missed. Or does it mean explosions on boilers supplying steam engine? As a simple reader I am confused please.

--Dore chakravarty 07:32, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

It does mean the latter - "failures of boilers, particularly those of steam engines." means "failures of boilers, particularly BOILERS of steam engines.". Unless the context clearly means something else, a word such as "that" or "those" refers to the nearest word it can stand for. I think, however, in this situation one could both shorten it and remove any ambiguity by saying "particularly steam engine boilers". Robin Patterson 08:58, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Opinion please[]

(Copy please) I have made many new pages so far keeping in mind the Engineerfication:mostly copy from Wikipedia. Not had any comments so far. Please see that they are to your requirement. Pending your opinion I am continuing as I may not have much time to spend due to my old age. Any corrections I can incorporate or change my method of working. Also my programme is to spend about two months in India from May end. During this time I may not be active on this Wiki. Please opine early. Sending this to Mr.Robin Patterson, Mr Siafu and Mr.King2006 for thier opinion as well.

--Dore chakravarty 21:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Engineering talk:Categorisation[]

Please see to the above for opinion.

--Dore chakravarty 21:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Engineering talk:categorisation[]

Please see link below:


--Dore chakravarty 21:52, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


Please see opinion on this and suggest.

--Dore chakravarty 13:43, 7 April 2006 (PDT)

My opinion[]

Urgent action requested

Opined as follows after copying many articles from Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has varieties of subjects catering to various categories of people. Hence the articles are required to be made to highest standard, particularly in English. Engineering Wikia caters only for technocrats. Therefore articles from Wikipedia when copied to Engineering have to be made simple for normal reading and understanding by all technocrats and also Engineerfication of the same is essential. As English has become one of the universal languages in many parts of the world with minimum of complexity this requirement is all the more essential. As these have been done by me with the above requirement in view it is essential that someone else checks and edits to make it nearing the required perfectness for engineering.
So far no one has come up to check and edit mine or write new articles. Why, is not clear to me. However I guess that the present day output of specialists from Academic Institutions are towards specific subjects so much narrowed down and also job opportunities being so good for them, they, in general, are not interested in general engineering at all.
I will not be very active for few months from last week of this month as I am going out of NZ to India.
Can you please look into and do the needful.

Copy also sent to User:Robin Patterson and User:Srini

--Dore chakravarty 22:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. Especially your explanations would be useful for our howto project ( ). I think we could work in close cooperation, as you could direct people for the exact technologies and howto, and normal technocrats (or geeks) would find the engineering wikia really fantastic. My point is, I think it is good if the Engineering wiki transformed the Wikipedia articles this way, and wrote about more exact things.
--Inyuki 10:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)