User talk:Ahering@cogeco.ca

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Please Refrain From Baseless Threats

You clearly have disregarded Wikipedia's guidelines by placing external links in areas that are inappropriate. Threatening me on my talk page is simply another attempt to mask your disregard for these guidelines. If you continue to violate these standards and place self serving and self promoting links, I will continue reverting them. Since you refused to gather a peer consensus as is the recommended method of resolving disputes and was suggested by myself and User:Torinir and since we are awaiting mediation, I strongly suggest you refrain from placing any further threats on my [talk:Calltech]. Calltech 02:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I provided my response on the appropriate pages. When you grow a backbone, Calltech, you will not be so frightened as to avoid direct discussions outside of the public forum. Achim 01:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Helpme

According to Wikipedia:Changing usernames, your contribution history can only be merged to an account that does not exist yet. I suggest just sticking to the non-email name, Achim, and continue editing! Te ke 03:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MikeDayoub

Hi Achim, I invite you to discuss the bounding article before I make major edits to it. MikeDayoub 13:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your advice that I not edit until I become an expert on these topics, I completely agree. My intent is to provide a reader's viewpoint until I can find articles worthy and eligible for citation.

Do you think my questions to you on Active and Passive systems could help improve clarity in wiki definitions of those systems? The definitions seem to be oriented to large buildings and the classical implementation of those systems. I've seen statements from CPSC hearings and the Fire Safety Council that those systems are morphing because of smart homes and smart devices.

I think the article on bounding could be strengthened.

As someone who came to Wiki hoping to see a review of the regulatory landscape, I want to improve the definition of bounding to be more generic. While you've contributed a great deal of detail regarding firestops and fire safety, it seems to weight the bounding article at the expense of other industries where bounding applies. I predict ultimately the article will get refactored to get that balance. Would you agree?

Here's one example sentence which I think needs strengthening

Safety related products generally have to undergo product certification to enable their use by the public.

On improvement, I hope the reader gets a clear picture of what products are required by law to be certified. I realize how difficult that is for an article which attempts to discuss a legal term which is regulated differently in different countries. What a challenge. Safety related products is a fuzzy term too. I think we need a lawyer in the Wiki Fire Protection WikiProject. :)

--MikeDayoub 07:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I have already responded to you in private e-mail and will leave it at that, except to say that absent bounding, I do not think you will be successful selling the product you have patented, which appears to be your aim here - not that there is anything wrong with that, mind you. If I were you, I would focus on:

1. getting a standard written
2. getting it into applicable codes
3. seeking distribution.

Really, what you're after is to sell your patented idea and circumnavigating product certification. That is very difficult indeed and I think your time may be better spent in easier pursuits that make money. The construction industry is very conservative and its products are driven by Underwriters Laboratories labels - not exclusively, but for easiest acceptance and sales for you. Go to UL, young man, I say.--Achim 04:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ahering, I joined Wiki in order to ask you some questions regarding your fire safety articles. I have read the articles and many linked websites regarding fire safety, product certification and bounding. I have questions the articles don't answer so I'm asking here in hopes of building robustness in this topic. I am not sure this user talk page is the right place to ask you questions so please direct me if there's a better message vehicle in Wikipedia.

My questions are best asked in the form of a fictional example.

My son wrote a software program he wants to sell on Ebay. He has a microphone attached to his PC. His software recognizes the sound of a smoke detector. When the smoke detector sounds, the software sends a signal to an electrical latch on the doggie door so our dog can escape the smoke.

Here are my questions:

Active Protection Systems: If he sells the software without the doggie door, is this software an active protection system? He wants to sell the electrically controlled doggie door too. Does it now become an active protection system?

Fire suppression systems: The software also turns off the attic fan to limit oxygen to the fire. Is the software a fire suppression system?

Bounding: What laws prohibit him from selling this software and the electrically controlled door latch without certification? NFPA? UL? (Comment: The bounding article seems to be written more from a liability perspective, not a prohibition perspective. Small electrical device manufacturers may be willing to bear liability risk, but unwilling to break laws prohibiting the sale of uncertified products. I'm hoping for more understanding of how small manufacturers do business until they can bear the cost of product certification.)

Thanks for your contributions to Wiki on this topic. I hope my questions are received as I intended, to learn more and improve the articles.

--MikeDayoub 17:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Response:

I will respond to you by e-mail, since we're both accessible that way within Wikipedia. You can gather the intellectual framework for what you're asking right on my website: http://www.geocities.com/astximw.--Achim 01:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Further Response:

I can see that you have a patent: http://www.freshpatents.com/Power-strip-with-smoke-detection-auto-shutoff-dt20050804ptan20050168901.php for a device and I conclude that you cannot afford the testing and certification, which is what makes it difficult for you to get to market. The need for bounding is just one of those buggaboos that you cannot get round. Many have tried and it is simply not worth the effort. It's sort of a pity, as good idea often go absolutely nowhere, but we're talking about safety, which gets into constitutional rights. So, as I outlined in my e-mail to you, you can find further information on http://www.geocities.atsximw as well as many other sites on the topic of fire protection, but that is the long and short of it. In a case like yours where quite possibly no standard exists to test your product and no code calls for it, you have to start with lots of money and right at the bottom. You need to get someone like UL to come up with a standard or accept your first draft, run a test and get a listing. With that in hand, you MAY have a chance along with other data, like you mentioned about barn fires in your country, and see about getting something written into a fire code or a building code. But all of this is a long and hard road and unfortunately, there are no shortcuts. Likewise, if you picked up a toaster at Walmart and your son got zapped and suffered ill health effects, you would also not be interested in any sob story from a manufacturer about how he could not afford the testing and product certification. You'd sue and win, guaranteed. That's why Walmart would not carry that product and that's why you're not getting anywhewre with your widget, novel and nifty though it may be. I too wish it were easier, but remember that I did not invent this status quo, I merely uploaded it. It is not hard to find independent verification of all that I have written here. So, before you start editing, I suggest you become an expert on the matter yourself.--Achim 02:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

<<unblock| OK, I need a generic solution here. I KEEP GETTING BLOCKED, because of this other person ACADEMENORTH, who has been banned. Apparently, there is some autoblocking happening. So, simply unblocking me does not work, quite apparently. I need something more permanent. As you can see below, there is something afoot that keeps autoblocking this person and then I keep getting blocked and unblocked - this fluctuates from one minute where I CAN EDIT, to the next, where I cannot do so any longer. One moment I'm blocked and the next moment I'm not. If we both have the same IP address, I need some sort of other permanent solution so I don't get affected by that person. Single unblocks have been done now by more than one administrator. That does not appear to do the trick. I request assistance. Next, I have pasted the latest block I have encountered: Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by JzG for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Acadamenorth". The reason given for Acadamenorth's block is: "Vandalism, harrassment, general pointlessness.". Your IP address is 216.221.81.98. --Achim 23:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC) >>

Autoblocks now lifted. I'm sorry that you were caught in the collateral damage of another user being blocked. This is because the MediaWiki software automatically blocks vandal's IP address - otherwise a blocked vandal would just log-out and resume vandalising. We have new versions of the software becoming available which allow us to selectively block an IP address without blocking logged-in users. But it will take time for these tools to come online and be picked up. Until then, there isn't a permanent solution, but please rest assured that there will be soon. Unblocking someone blocked in error isn't easy - privacy issues mean we can't see all the relevant facts and must do some unblocking by slow guesswork. It can often take hours. As I say, I'm sorry you've been caught up in this but your reputation on Wikipedia is fully intact and we honestly do value your contributions. ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

unblock|Apparently, another user by the name of ACADEMENORTH, who was blocked for apparently good reasons, has the SAME IP ADDRESS as I do. So, as he was blocked, so was I. I am not that person. I don't know this person. His former page was written in another language that I don't speak. Please fix this for me!--Achim 23:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

We need more info. Please post the entire block message. Sasquatch t|c 00:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes the username you have given doesn't exist so cannot have been blocked, did you change the capitalisation or anything? --pgk^(talk) 09:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I think they removed the whole user account Academenorth. I could not find it anymore either. "sasquatch" though said he unblocked me....--Achim 18:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Okiedokie: I copied and pasted this, after attempting to edit a random page just to bring this message up:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by JzG for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Acadamenorth". The reason given for Acadamenorth's block is: "Vandalism, harrassment, general pointlessness.". Your IP address is 216.221.81.98.

Also, just like yesterday, when I went over this same thing with administrator "friday" (whom I've e-mailed on the topic, as well as JzG), my block went off and on repeatedly. Same thing today. Even after this block, I was temporarily able to edit and now it's off again. Intermittent blocking....--Achim 00:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Dude: I do not sell anything on my pages. I have intentions of uploading more to your site but can't do everything at once. So, where I don't have time yet and I know that I have a definition on my site, I put in a link. No personality cult here.--Ahering@cogeco.ca 00:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC) *My Website

[edit] Welcome stuff

Welcome! Hello, Ahering@cogeco.ca, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Melchoir 03:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

I have blocked you for linkspamming. If you are willing to stop adding the link (at the top of this page) to pages, I will unblock you. NSL E _(T+C)^{(seen this?)} at 00:45 UTC (2006-04-11)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Rs90.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rs90.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I had forgotten the tag. I re-loaded the image and this time remembered to select the correct release...--Achim 05:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

It is still untagged. Did you take this picture? If it is solely your work, please use {{GFDL}}. NSL E _(T+C) at 05:02 UTC (2006-04-15)

[edit] Username signature use in Wikipedia articles

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Please, however, refrain from using your username signature in Wikipedia articles. Username signatures are used for talk (discussion) pages only. --Kurt 23:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Live and learn I suppose. I believe that I did that a while back, having misunderstood the policy.--Achim 03:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Internal links

When adding internal links ([[ ... ]]), please refer to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links). In particular, one should very rarely add the same link twice (eg. link fire at the top of article, but all following instances of "fire" should remain unlinked). Also, terms that the vast majority of readers will understand don't usually need to be linked to (eg. "carpet" may not need to be linked to in most contexts).

Anyway, I think most of the content you're contributing is pretty useful, so thank you very much. --Interiot 02:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About Authority Having Jurisdiction

Please see the Authority Having Jurisdiction talk page. -- backburner001 23:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

The re-direct for the first article (linked in the heading above) should work now. I'm going to hold off on the AHJ re-direct until I can find out whether those same letters are used to abbreviate for other phrases also (which would merit the creation of a disambiguation page). -- backburner001 03:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Endothermic

Ahering, you seem to be relatively new at this. Regarding your contribtution to the endothermic page, in which had to clean for you, a couple of rules to follow:

Link a word only one time in a section (e.g. you linked the word water 5 times in one paragraph).
Bold a word only one time per page (e.g. you bolded endothermic 4 times in one paragraph.
Don’t link header titles (note how the header "endothermic" above is not linked.
Break your paragraphs up into readable chunks (online tension eye-strain requires this).

We all have to follow the same agreed upon format here at WP. Thanks:--Sadi Carnot 00:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Creating re-directs

Create re-directs by typing the following: #REDIRECT [[PAGENAME]]. Replace "PAGENAME" with the name of the article you want to re-direct to ([[Authroity Having Jurisdiction]], for example). Hope this helps. Let me know if you need anymore help. -- backburner001 17:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Large edits marked "minor"

On 10 May 2006, you added a 900 word section to Liquified petroleum gas and marked it as a minor edit. However, your edit was not a minor edit. As per Wikipedia policy, minor edits are restricted to truly trivial changes such as correcting mispelled words and capitalization. See: Help:Minor edit. —Ryanrs 17:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categorization

I've rolled back a whole slew of your edits placing a whole bunch of topics under a few categories. Such placements like you did seem to defeat the purpose of having categories in the first place, as it makes our category system "flat". Please be careful which categories you place things in, and find the best category for each article. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Instead of arbitrarily rolling it back, you may have enquired as to my reasons. As it is, the categories concerning items related to fire, fire prevention and fire protection do not make sense. Also, the links to the German Wikipedia go to the wrong place, fire prevention, when most of the good stuff on fire protection does not appear. For instance, since you remove the fire protection category from fire protection products, just exactly what reasoning is behind that??--Achim 21:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

This is because there are much more appropriate subcategories under the main "Fire Protection" category that these articles belong in. Listing them in both that category and their parent category defeats the purpose of categorizing. The idea is to find the most appropriate place - not just smear it all over the landscape. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I can't find the mention in policy, but I believe it's common practice to not list an article in both a category and its parent category at the same time. If an article covers fire generally, then put it in Category:Fire. If it covers one or two more specific topics, put it only in the more specific category, not in Category:Fire as well. --Interiot 03:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Channel Tunnel fire

I'm conscious that I'm overdue to reply to points you've made twice on the talk page of Channel Tunnel fire. I'm tied up with a few projects at the moment, so I won't be able to do a detailed response until mid-August. Please be patient.Ecb 20:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I'm just worried about the categorization

In regards to articles related to fire protection, at this point, I'm just worried about how they're being categorized. See Wikipedia:Categorization when you get a chance. Additionally, see Wikipedia:Manual of style when you get a chance. This will help cut down on little confrontations in the future. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MI cable properties

MI cable is approved by Canadian and other codes for use in explosion hazard areas. No, it's not "explosionproof" in the sense of remaining intact in any arbitrarily-large explosion, but wiring in MI cable will not trigger an explosion in a hazardous area. Similarly, "fireproof" is in the pragmatic sense that the MI wiring would survive typical building fire scenarios to keep essential services such as fire pumps or alarm systems working. The wiring need not survive longer than the structure it is in. True, when the Sun goes nova, everything burns...but the reasons for use of MI cable are for much better bounded conditions. I'm surprised someone who worked in the test and cerficiation business would delibrately confuse two senses of "explosionproof" like this. --Wtshymanski 17:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Nothing deliberate. The difference is that there are products out there, typically marketed to hard target applications like military, which improve explosion resistance of assets. I was involved with this. "explosionproof" is a common misnomour for that unfortunately. Fireproof is just as wrong. It's particularly inapplicable to a product with fixed ratings like MI cable, which fails some of its tests and leaves junction boxes unprotected (not that this is the fault of the manufacturer, rather than a welcome oversight by the electrical engineers)...--Achim 23:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notice

Dear Ahering@cogeco.ca,

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Unfortunately, using your e-mail address as your username is not a good idea. Wikipedia content is extensively copied and the site itself is one of the most visited sites in the world. Any edit you make on Wikipedia will have your username attached to it, and using your email address will make you a tempting target for spammers. We recommend that you change your username at Wikipedia:Changing username in order to prevent abuse.

If you need any help, simply contact me on my talk page, or go to Wikipedia:Help desk. Another option is to place {{helpme}} on your own talk page, and someone will come shortly to help. Remember to sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). Again, welcome!

Big top 16:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello, Ahering

Hello, Ahering, may I be of assistance? –- kungming·2 | ^(Talk·^Contact) 03:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you have two Wikipedia accounts? –- kungming·2 | ^(Talk·^Contact) 03:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not too bad to use it as your account name - after all, all our inboxes are going to be flooded with spam anyways! And, good fellow Wikipedians wouldn't spam. However, if in the future, you wish to become an admin or taking an even greater role, you can change it then. Don't worry about it now. Happy editing! –- kungming·2 | ^(Talk·^Contact) 06:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MedCab Case: 2006-10-01 Call centre

Your Mediation Cabal case, 2006-10-01 Call centre has been opened, though as of this writing a mediator has not yet selected the case. If you wish to stop by the 2006-10-01 Call centre page and add more and specific information to assist the mediator in understanding the situation, please feel free to do so in the proper sections. Thanks! ~Kylu (u|t) 16:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:07840drw4.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:07840drw4.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you.

It seems you have answered your own question you left on my talk page. You are correct, the image I nominated is not used in any article. This was the reason for the nomination as an orphan image. Thanks.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 11:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Structural steel gallery change

Moving those images to a gallery didn't improve the article. Look at the whitespace at the top now; that's not an improvement.

If you think you can clean it up, feel free, but I am inclined to revert back to the pre-gallery version if you aren't able to improve the gallery.

Thanks... Georgewilliamherbert 19:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I use a slightly wider than "normal" browser window, but I haven't had the problem of the images there tailing off the end of the article. If that's what you're trying to fix, I'd say resizing the images and fixing the caption on that second one, to be more appropriate, would work better. Is that what you were getting at? Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert 23:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liquified petroleum gas

Hey, I notice you were the one who originally added the mitigation section to the article a few months ago. It's not quite in the right tone for wikipedia (a little too advice-phrased and opinionated), but I figure you'd have the knowledge on the subject to rewrite it. I changed a couple of things in the intro of the article, and perhaps we could get the rest up to a higher standard. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 20:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/h/e/User_talk%7EAhering%40cogeco.ca_dcc8.html"