User talk:Robert Tito: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Kim van der Linde
(→‎Willie on wheels?: new section)
imported>Robert Tito
m (Removing all content from page)
 
(41 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{archive box|auto=long}}


== See ==
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk:Stephen_Ewen&action=history
==question==
Hi Robert! I have a question. At wikipedia, I have grown used to the popups script. (by User:Lupin). Is it ported to Citizendium?--[[User:Anupam Srivastava|Anupam Srivastava]] 17:18, 9 May 2007 (CDT)
:Anupam, actually no, but I am not certain about using them in the future. We are talking about them but no verdict yet. HTH, [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
::Ah... thanks for the information. For what its worth, popups is one of the best tools out there :D, especially for those who want to browse, not edit.
== carbon in life ==
Hi, during a cleanup operation I came upon your old draft [[Robert_Tito/carbon_in_life]]. You know better its purpose and the right title/place :) --[[User:Aleksander Stos|Aleksander Stos]] 06:48, 15 May 2007 (CDT)
== Decision Support==
As you may have some interest in it, please have a look at [[Clinical decision support system]] and, if possible, lend a helping hand in editing that. [[User:Supten Sarbadhikari|Supten]] 22:33, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
== Unprotecting Talk:Logical positivism ==
Would it be safe to unprotect [[Talk:Logical positivism]] yet? It's in a block of articles I signed up for for the Big Cleanup and it needs a checklist. [[User:Petréa Mitchell|Petréa Mitchell]] 13:00, 20 May 2007 (CDT)
Petréa, it is unprotected. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
== Talk:Periodic Table ==
Mr Tito-
I created a template for a periodic table element on the talk page of [[Talk:Periodic_Table_of_the_Elements]].  Let me know what you think.--[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 15:16, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
==ID==
I agree that ID means lotsa other things.  But so far as I can tell, there is a lot of energy being devoted here in CZ to Intelligent Design, and they are calling it ID throughout.  In Wikipedia they have something called disambiguity, if I recall, that lists various things such as "Big Three" or common names such as "Jack Crawford", in an article, with descriptions and links to the relevant one.  I'm sure that the same will happen here in CZ if it hangs around long enough.... Cheers! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:38, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
:I just made a [[ID (disambiguation)]] article before I saw that you had changed the [[ID]] article around.  I think that you ought to incorporate your edits into the disambiguaiton article as this wouldn't lead a search to a dead end, the way it does with your edit. If you aren't sure about how to do this, I will ask an editor or someone for help in straightening this out.[[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 11:10, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
==[[Haber process]]==
Hi Robert. Earlier today, I created the [[Haber process]] article. I've added a respectable amount of information, but I think that it could greatly be improved with the help of an expert such as yourself. I've added almost everything I can think of, but I'm only currently studying Chemistry for my [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCSE GCSE], so my knowledge isn't close to what it could be. Thanks for any help you could offer, [[User:Oliver Smith|Oliver Smith]] 16:01, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
:Hi Oliver, I saw some of it this afternoon - and generally it is of a good quality. I have not looked into details - as some where not completely correct as it appeared but that was just a birds eye view. I will see what I can do to help you complete it to a full article [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 16:40, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
::Sorry - haven't been active at CZ for a while to add the changes. I wasn't confident enough about the science behind water ions, so thanks very much for clearing that up and adding it to the article. [[User:Oliver Smith|Oliver Smith]] 14:29, 10 June 2007 (CDT)
==Your galleries==
Rob, when you get a few minutes sometime, how about going through your picture gallery and adding licensing, a description, and the source to the images?  ---[[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 13:55, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
:these are all private pictures ©RP Tito
Cool. Do me a favor and just tag 'em all with the following when you get a few minutes.
<pre>
{{Copyright-by
|copyright holder=Robert Tito
}}
</pre>
[[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 19:24, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
== [[:Image:Polymers.jpg]] ==
Rob, do me a favor and place some licensing data there. Thanks, ---[[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 03:10, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
:Steve, that is not needed, is it PLoS and per definition PD, these two are synonyms. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
::It still needs the source documented so someone can check it and others can ''re-use'' it; and PLoS is CC-by so it ''requires'' attribution: See http://www.plos.org/ and scroll down to the bottom. See [[:Image:Young_zebra_finch.jpg]] for a properly documented image upload page from PLoS. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 22:33, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
== Quantum property reference in article:Light ==
Mr Tito-
Can you provide a reference to those experiments which demonstrated the duality in the properties of light?  --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 10:36, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
:It's either Rob or Dr. Tito :) Yes, I do have to check my grey memory cells or my references. As far as I know it was published both in Phys. Rev. A and Nature - but I will let you know. I will have to check about your move - because that was not from WP but from MY knowledge - not cut&paste.
[[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 10:51, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
::I don't mean that it was _from_ WP, but in an effort to conform more to CZ style, articles need to be more or less a narrative than a collection of categorical segments about a subject (I've been told).--[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 10:52, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
::that will be the next stage - you started with the very classical model whereas nowadays only the modern view remains - admittedly given examples from the classical billiard balls view. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
Billiard balls? --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 10:57, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
:Billiard Balls?? :-) [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 11:11, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
== billiard ==
A sport, where it is the purpose to use a queue and by hitting the white (own) ball hit the other players (white or yellow) ball and a red ball. Unlike pool it has many forms how to achieve a carambole, and none is achieved by removing one of the three balls from the playing table. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 18:43, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
== Light article ==
I really don't know what to do with this article. Part of me wants to jump in and start changing things, but another part of me wants to step back and point out mistakes so the author can fix them. In this case, I'm not an editor (though, ironically, I'm fairly interested in the underlying physics of computer technology). That means I don't really have to worry about questions about the editors role. But darn it, I ''do'' know a something about quantum mechanics! [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 14:19, 8 June 2007 (CDT)
:it should start with electricity and magnetism leading to electromagnetism. explaining it using for instance E=mc<sup>2</sup> and simple maths to lead to a wave equation. Then become descriptive. But then any approach can work if it is done properly. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 14:56, 8 June 2007 (CDT)
== water and conformation ==
Oliver, glad to be able to assist. You should remember that water is rather special - the only substance known that has 0.75 cal/mole rest (vibrational) energy at 0K. Its structure also determines the shape (configuration and conformation) of macromoecules - the cage water can form around molecules do provide it with an additional stiffness and rigidity. many partially charged molecules share hydrogen bondas wiht water. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 15:10, 10 June 2007 (CDT)
==DNA and gratitude==
Thanks, Rob, for helping to fix that mess. [[User:Nancy Sculerati|Nancy Sculerati]] 23:04, 10 June 2007 (CDT)
== stochastic convergence article ==
Don't you think a good starting point for explaining ideas in understandable language is having a clear understanding of them in the first place? I don't mean to sound arrogant or anything, but the initial definition didn't even make sense, and the one being presented in the article now doesn't look like it's the right one. I guess I have a bad habit of asking questions when I think something is wrong instead of jumping in and rewriting it myself. [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 17:17, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
:Greg, without understanding a topic don't write about it, and heaven forbid try explaining it. But since a person started out why not guide along side and help out without jumping in and rewrite it yourself. Just as my notion was to say to him: go ahead tell it in your own words and explain it - without any mathematical gibberish only scientists will understand. Everybody deserves a chance to do something, and make mistakes on his/her way, specially when somebody isn't experienced in writing articles or explaining abstract ideas. It took me some time to get my message over to my students in a way they could understand and invitting enough to delve into the matter themselves. So lets see how he is going along and help - standing at the sideline encouraging him to get on. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 17:39, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
I guess that's what I hoped I was doing, but maybe it didn't come across that way. [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 18:01, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
:as I perceived it, just some people are very sensitive when it comes to criticism. And in the process of creating an article many are irritated easily. That is the main reason - specially when I see the effort and dislike the chosen path - I only comment on the talk page in mild words and do very minor edits to get the article in a better way. As you said yourself, sometimes you come to think: darn let me write it - but that would only create a problem where none was ontended or eneded. So lets follow the creation of stochas and lets see if it converges on its way :) [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 18:33, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
==stochastic convergence==
I tried to make it clear in the very first comment on the talk page that the article was a "work in progress" and could contain errors,  in this case an incomplete tex expression.  I thought it was OK that a non-approved stub article could contain a very obvious error for a few hours.  Was I wrong about that? 
[[User:Ragnar Schroder|Ragnar Schroder]] 20:31, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
:absolutely not - but letting an error (even obvious ones) sit on a page '''can''' result in some remarks. So where it of course is possible it doesn't seem wise. Maybe building the sentences on the talk page before cutting and pasting them into the article page isn't such a bad idea after all.
Just something to consider. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 20:37, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
== Bolognese ==
I've been making it for 40 years from *many* recipes, including the best one of all, Marcella Hazan's (which I've tweaked a tiny bit), and I've *never* seen leeks as an ingredient.  Carrots *always*, sometimes more carrots than onions, actually, and some celery, but no carrots.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 19:03, 30 July 2007 (CDT)
:nevertheless it is used - or spring onions when leek is not freshly avalable. But then I am from Europe and a frequent visitor in Italy, as well as a foodie and cook. I do know Italian food prepared in other countries differ from the original local ''concoction'' but always is delicious to enjoy (well some trattoria and pizzeria owners can't cook but ok) [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
::I'll be darned -- I use leeks in a lot of my *French* recipes, never in my Italian. I'll give them a try in my next Bolognese.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 19:33, 30 July 2007 (CDT)
:just do not overdo the amount, remember: leek-onions-chive-spring onions all have somewhat the same palate, basil and oregano are ok (and garlic of course), one or two thin leeks will be too much but a nice sturdy leek is just enough taste to add to the flavor. In some regions zucchini (gourgette) is used as well - though I do not favor that taste. But as with all cooking it is just a matter of balance and taste: you want to know what it is you are eating - don't overdo any of the ingredients. In case of bologne tomatoes are one of the basic ingredients so you can (mis)use them as you wish. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span> 23:37, 1 August 2007 (CDT)
== Masala Massalla ==
I dunno.  I was just using Google, without regard for language.  There were MANY more for masala.  I just did a Google specifying *French* -- in French they also say masala many many more times than massalla.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:47, 1 August 2007 (CDT)
:It's a curry ==> India is the origin [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
::see the talk page -- it was invented in England
== French ==
I know my French: "soupe" is absolutely NOT the same as "potage"; two different things. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 00:00, 2 August 2007 (CDT)
:that's why it is called potage, the same as potage de légumes - it indicates its origin!. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
:unfortunately having been to France many many times the term used for a soup is potage in each and every restaurant, with or without michelin stars. I guess you have not visited France often. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
::I lived in Tahiti, a French Overseas Territory, for 25 years and was married to a Frenchwoman for 25 years.  I have visited France many, many times, sometimes for as long as two months.  As I said somewhere, the Larousse Gastronomique calls Onion Soup "Soupe a l'oignon" or "Soupe a l'oignon gratinee."  "Potage" is the OVERALL name for soups BUT "Soupe" is a sub-entry in the Potage group: it refers to certain regional recipes and potages that have *bread* in them, as onion soup does. I suggest that you return, say, to Au Pied de Cochon in Paris and check their menu.... Or, you can visit their website at:
::*http://www.restaurantaupieddecochon.ca/menu_eng.html
::and check the menu for yourself.  I believe you will see that it is indeed called "soupe a l'oignon gratinee"  Bon appetit! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 19:00, 3 August 2007 (CDT)
:I have had it last year iin that same restaurant as Paris is just 350 miles away from me, andas I remember corectly they used potage last year and only soupe for what you would call clear broth and that same was used in many other restaurants throughout la douce france. On se connait.
== Catalog of Italian cuisine ==
I am writing you since you were the originator of that article. I have tried setting it up as a table. Please take a look at [[User:Luigi_Zanasi/Catalog_of_Italian_cuisine]] and let us know what you think on the talk page. [[User:Luigi Zanasi|Luigi Zanasi]] 13:26, 3 August 2007 (CDT)
:cool way to presnt it. I however am not the creator of the catalog, I merely added some dishes. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
== Wat kritiek ==
Dag Robert, ik schrijf dit in het Nederlands om niet de hele wereld mee te laten genieten. Mijn oog viel op [[Haber process|dit artikel]]. Dat is toch beneden peil? Vol spelfouten, en niet erg zakelijk. Ik zag dat je als commentaar gaf dat de structuur van ionen in water erg gecompliceerd is (dat is waar), maar om electrolyse uit te leggen is de structuur van water niet zo relevant. Ik vraag me trouwens af wat electrolyse met Haber-Bosch te maken heeft: zo ver ik weet wordt electrolyse niet in ammoniak fabrieken toegepast, het is veel te duur. Het artikel heeft trouwens veel overlap met [[hydrogen]], zou je daar eens naar kunnen kijken? --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 08:03, 27 September 2007 (CDT)
Paul,
voor zover ik weet was dat versie 0 en voordat ik een junior onderuit haal op inhoud laat ik eerst wat verder gaan en vertel privé wat er o.a. aan schort - niet de gehele wereld hoeft daarvan mee te genieten, zoals je zelf reeds opmerkte. Ik zag er geen verdere wijzigingen in en heb het maar daarbij gelaten ook al omdat er v.w.b. chemie geen of weinig deelnemers zijn. Een srtikel van mijn hand wacht bijvoorbeeld al vanaf maart op iemand die het wil nomineren. Niet erg stimulerend. Groet, Rob. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
:Wat voor artikel is dat? En wat is nomineren? Kan ik (als chemie editor) dat doen?
:Over stimulerend gesproken: ik krijg de indruk dat ik de enige ben die wat bijdraagt in schei- en natuurkunde. Verder geloof ik niet dat ook maar een van de ongeveer 40 artikelen die ik bijgedragen heb door iemand bekeken is (behalve [[Amsterdam]]). --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 10:47, 27 September 2007 (CDT)
:Paul,
Het gevoel dat jij nu hebt heb ik dus al vanaf october 2006. Vanaf juni 07 was voor mij de maat vol en heb ik maar eens een afwachtende houding gezocht. Macromolecular Chemistry is het artikel, verwijzing op mijn pagine. Alleen editors kunnen het nomineren en het tot een geplaatst artikel promoveren. Aangezien ik vrijwel een jaar lang de enige actieve was kon dat dus niet. Overigens amsterdam had ik ook kunnen pennen, als geboren en getogen mokummer - jordanees uit de westerstraat :). Ik ben blij dat er eindelijk eens een tweede editor is, en niet eentje die na 3 weken weer weg blijft, of uitsluitend privé-ideeen probeert door te drukken. Mazzel, Rob. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
== Macromolecules ==
Dear Rob, I (in my capacity of chemistry editor) will read your article on macromolecules and perhaps make a few suggestions (or perhaps not, I have to see). And then, after I appproved it, what do I do? Do I add some template to the discussion page?  I see lots of talk about the approval procedure, but it is not clear to me what to do in concreto. Groetjes van een medemokummer, --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 02:51, 28 September 2007 (CDT)
In the meantime I looked somewhat at the article, and I see some sentences that I do not completely understand. I could make a copy of the article somewhere and make some changes into a direction that imho would be clearer (guessing the meaning of unclear sentences), or I could do it in the article itself, after which you can run a diff and change things back if necessary. What do you think is best?
--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 03:57, 28 September 2007 (CDT)
:Change where changes might be needed, it will be visible by a diff. T.I.A. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
Hello Robert, I read quickly through [[macromolecular chemistry]] and I think most of it is very clear, with the exception (strangely enough) of the first two paragraphs. I copy them here and I ask you some questions in small print if you don't mind (and if you do mind it is too late). --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 10:07, 28 September 2007 (CDT)
----
Macromolecular chemistry (from macro = large) is the study of the physical, biological and chemical structure, properties, composition, mechanisms,
<small> Mechanisms of  molecules? Do you mean mechanical properties? reaction mechanisms, mechanical props etc etc </small>
and reactions of [[macromolecules]]. A macromolecule is a molecule that consists of repeated 'building blocks', that may not be identical. When the same building block is repeated, this block is called the [[Monomer|monomeric unit]] (monomer), and the resulting macromolecule is called a [[polymer]],
<small>According to IUPAC a ''macromolecule'' is a synonym of a ''polymer molecule''. A polymer is a substance consisting of  polymer molecules.
Further it is '''not''' necessary that the monomers are the same to speak of a polymer molecule.
Do you agree with that? I agree, BUT my point here is to distinguish them from what "the public" sees as polymers: plastics etc putting more emphasize on the biological function of a molecule in a solution e.g. a living cell as opposite to kevlar and nylon that people are all too familiar with.
</small>
or by its generic name [[plastic]]. [[nylon|Nylon]] is an example of a macromolecule that is an artificial polymer.
Technically speaking a macromolecule is a polymer
<small> You just said that a polymer (or polymer molecule? ) has to consist of the same building blocks, now you imply that  macromolecule is always  synonymous with  polymer, Because for understanding I made the distinction where technically (i.e. scientifically they are the same) however I emphasize on the functional side of molecules and distinguish between macromolecules as the more biological polymer as compared to the plastics having a more structural function.
isn't this a contradiction? </small>
and as far as macromolecules are involved that are not dissolved in a solvent, the treatment
<small> what treatment?  how to discuss about them, how to analyze them</small>
of macromolecules is identical to polymers. However since the difference between solid state macromolecules or polymers, as they are more widely referred to,
<small> Do you repeat here that macromolecules and polymers are the same?</small>
and polymers in solution are huge
<small> Do you want to say here that macromolecules in the solid state differ from macromolecules in solution, or do you somehow distinguish macromolecules from polymer molecules? This sentence is much too long.</small>
when it comes to behavior and functionality the IUPAC as in the 1980's and specifically during the IUPAC's conference in Rumania mentions the difference between the two synonyms as being based on solid state and solution with one overlap being recognized: gels.
<small> What do yo mean with (i) difference between the two synonyms (in my understanding two synonyms do not have differences, they are two names for the same thing) (ii) what do you mean by one overlap? gels are no solutions and no solids at the same time they are solid and solution (it was supposed to be a new part I have made a start of in a different article)</small>
Moreover during the years the term macromolecules became more bound
<small> became more bound =  referred more often? you got it</small>
to biological polymers than non-biological polymers - most because of the lack of charge and conformation to functionality of the polymer, now referred to as macromoleecule.
<small>lack of charge and conformation to functionality? This is double Dutch to me. Do you say here once more that a macromolecule is a polymer? I try to make it easy for people and see polymers as "plastics" and biological polymers as macromolecules (charge and conformation determining functionality)</small>
----
I hope that I made it clear what my problems are and that we can resolve them very quickly.--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 10:07, 28 September 2007 (CDT)
see my comments within your remarks Rob.
== glycoside bonds ==
Hi Rob, I'm reading [[macromolecular chemistry]] and saw that you left open the kind of glycosidic bonds one has in polysaccharides. I don't know enough organic chemistry to fill this in, do you?--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 08:44, 29 September 2007 (CDT)
Same question for double stranded helix of DNA.--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 10:39, 29 September 2007 (CDT)
I finished reading it, and except for the second paragraph in the lead, I did not meet many problems. Still, I like to ask you to go over my changes very carefully, I may have inadvertently distorted your meaning. If so, it will probably clear to you why I did it and it will give you an idea of how to fix it, so that it becomes clear. Then I am ready to approve the article. Groetjes, Paul. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 10:39, 29 September 2007 (CDT)
== Macromolecular chemistry (finish) ==
Hi Rob, when you spend a few minutes checking my changes in [[macromolecular chemistry]], then we can close the book on it. I will approve the article and then it is ''klaar''. (But don't forget the question mark in DNA, Chris Day removed the ones in the glycosidic bonds). Best wishes, --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 06:43, 3 October 2007 (CDT)
Paul, een paar wijzigingen van je zijn ok, maar je hebt ook dingen weggehaald die impliciet benoemd zijn. Ik zal daar wel wijzigingen dienen toetevoegen die m.i. essentieel zijn. Ik heb het alleen beredruk. Reken op vandaag of morgen [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
== Van der Waals ==
Hi Rob.  Nice to see you about.  I believe [[Van der Waals]], at least in my reading the biography, ought be nominated for approval. &nbsp;&mdash;[[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Stephen Ewen|(Talk)]] 14:49, 4 October 2007 (CDT)
:Since he was Dutch yes, let me see. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;<span style="background:grey">&nbsp;<font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font>&nbsp;</span>
::Likewise, good to see you around. I had already set up the approval process for [[Van_der_Waals_equation]] for David. You can see the edits [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Template%3AVan_der_Waals_equation%2FMetadata&diff=100181224&oldid=100181221 I made here].  If you agree it is ready for approval you can add your name as ToA editor2 to the metadata temlate. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris Day|(talk)]] 15:07, 4 October 2007 (CDT)
== Approval macromolecules ==
Hi Rob, I approved [[macromolecular chemistry]] (at least I think so, I'm usually very bad in filing out forms, usually I do something wrong). I'm glad there is some "leven in de brouwerij" (things are livening up in the brewerie), also on the van der Waals front. Best wishes, Paul. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 04:56, 5 October 2007 (CDT)
== Willie on wheels? ==
WoW is one of the most notorious vandals of wikipedia! Could you please explain? [[User:Kim van der Linde|Kim van der Linde]] 19:45, 7 October 2007 (CDT)

Latest revision as of 00:32, 3 November 2007

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_Tito&oldid=26027"