Today is 2. July 2024. The English Wikipedia has 6,844,453 Articles.
This is a talk page.This page is used for discussion only. Please do not experiment on this page.You can experiment on your userpage, or in the sandbox.If you would like to leave me a message, click here.Thank you.
Hello, ChNPP!Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Pomingalarna (talk) 23:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Dirk! Endlich gibt es auch einen deutschen Benutzer in der englischen Wikipedia! Da können wir uns doch auf Deutsch unterhalten, oder? Welches Themengebiet hattest du dir eigentlich vorgenommen? Vielleicht könnten wir ja auch etwas zusammen machen. Gruß -- Felix König✉14:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Natürlich in Deutsch! Mein Englisch ist nicht das beste! Aber eigentlich dank der vielen Webcam-talks mit Jesse recht gut geworden. Der ist ja sowiso zur Zeit in Deutschland. Da hat mein Deutschkurs wunder bewirkt ;-)! Ich werde mich wieder auf mein Themengebiet stürtzen. Du weist was ich meine, oder? ;-)! Auch noch ein paar andere. Mal sehen :-D! Grüße ChNPP (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ach so ist das. Ja, ich weiß es. Ich denke, das ist das gleiche Themengebiet wie meines. Aber das ist ja ein Zufall: Zwei deutschsprachige Benutzer in der englischen Wikipedia, die das gleiche Themengebiet haben. Viele Grüße -- Felix König✉14:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pfff! Was ist daran Lobby? Zählst du jetzt eigentlich zu den Kernkraftbefürwortern oder zu den Kernkraftgegnern, wenn du auf Lobby-Gedanken hast? Viele Grüße -- Felix König✉14:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So lange ich lebe, werde ich der Kernenergie treu bleiben! Es sei denn es gibt bis dahin schon was Besseres wie Energie aus alten Socken XD! Grüße ChNPP (talk) 15:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... ist der absolute Super-GAU. Einen halb deutschen-halb englischen Satz habe ich vorerst ganz entfernt. Bitte korrigiere den und setze ihn wieder rein. Viele Grüße -- Felix König✉11:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP, I have started the article, but the most of it is not mine. I don't know what you mean with "look at the map". The coordinates are correct and placed directly on BNPP unit 1. Best regards ChNPP (talk) 06:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Du hast noch keinen einzigen fehlerfreien Edit gemacht, glaube ich ;-) Bei Montalto di Castro hattest du Einzelnachweise angegeben, aber keinen Abschnitt mit <references /> erstellt. Und so weiter... Ich glaube, ich werde dich überwachen :-D Viele Grüße -- Felix König✉09:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sicherlich :-P! Ne, ich komm mit dem ganzen Zeug in der Englischen nicht sehr gut zurecht. Die Artikel sind eine Katastrophe, die Formatierungen sind Katastrophal, vor allem die Belege sind der Super-GAU. Das irritiert mich alles. Grüße ChNPP (talk) 13:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hä? Das mit den Belegen und den Formatierungen funktioniert doch haargenau gleich wie in der deutschen Wikipedia! Verstehe ich nicht. Viele Grüße -- Felix König✉16:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Eben nicht. Mit Belegen meine ich das die keine Referenzen-Abschnitt schon drinnen haben. Und die Formatierungen sind etwas anders. Grüße ChNPP (talk) 16:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hä? Ich verstehe nicht, was du meinst. Bei en und de muss man das doch so machen:
== Einzelnachweise bzw. References ==
<references />
Hä? In de muss ich das doch auch extra einfügen! Jetzt verstehe ich gar nichts mehr :-( Mal so eine Frage nebenbei: Was ist der Unterschied zwischen code und tt? Mit code: bla bla bla, und mit tt: bla bla bla. Viele Grüße -- Felix König✉16:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nachtrag: Ach, das ist ja seltsam! Hier auf en muss man ja die Infobox NPP manuell anpassen, das geht ja ger nicht automatisch :-O Grüße -- Felix König✉10:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Na, dass man den Namen selbst einschreiben muss. In de passt es das ja automatisch dem Lemma an. Wenn ich also die Infobox hier einfügen würde, würde sie User talk:ChNPP heißen. Tut sie aber nicht unbedingt:
{{Infobox power station
|name = Bad Steben Nuclear Power Plant
|image =
|image_caption = Bad Steben Nuclear Power Plant
|country = {{AUT}}
|location = [[Berlin]]
|coordinates = {{Coord|80.7461|12.8938|type:landmark_region:IR|display=inline,title}}
|owner = Du
|operator = Auch du
}}
Wie nett das ich jetztv ein Kernkraftwerk betreibe :-). Auch wieder ein SOWDU ;-)? Naja, man könnte ja mal ein Anpassen der Infobox in der en auf deutsche Basis erwägen. Jedoch denke ich nicht das dies aufgrund der Unterentwicklung der englischen Wikipedia geht. Ich sage es mal auf Engtlisch damit alle es Verstehen: The english wikipedia is shit! (Thats i mean is the convertation of the infoboxes). Grüße ChNPP (talk) 14:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I knew from your name instantly that you had an interest in nuclear power, it's good to see. You've made some interesting images of various reactor designs, what do you use as your references? I'm always willing to learn more, especially about the nuclear industry, so do you have any interesting links or information that may be of help? Thanks Skyrail (talk) 22:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Skyrail, the drawings were on the pictures I've found with Google. The best I had sought me out and in Microsoft Pain drawn. But what I send links, since I am not sure. extend Had you thought of this? Greetings ChNPP (talk) 13:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dirk. We dont all agree about nuclear power. While the English is a bit tricky, i thought i would share with you an article i found interesting recently. http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid467.php i am also thinking about a website (perhaps wiki based) were both pro and con positions on nuclear power could be voiced and people could then get informed arguments on both sides at one site. When i get this website up, i'll write you. i hope this finds you well. --Paxuscalta (talk) 09:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The poor photo that you keep adding into Deaerator[edit]
Please stop. If you continue to upload inappropriate images, such as into Deaerator, to Wikipedia, you will be blocked.
ChNPP:
Are you deliberately trying to be obnoxious by your repeated attempts to inject that very poor photo of a deaerator into the Deaerator article? Your attempt to hide your activities by making it appear that your sock puppet User:217.5.204.78 is making those repeated revisions really doesn't work ... its rather childish of you, isn't it?
Hello Mbeychok, Sorry, but i'm not the IP 217.5.204.78. I have do this image only one in the article. You must talk to the IP, not to me. Greetings ChNPP (talk) 01:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Mbeychok, i think you have problems to check this: I not the IP! Yes, there is a photo of me. But it does not mean that I'm the IP. zzz... --ChNPP (talk) 00:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ich sage es mal auf Engtlisch damit alle es Verstehen: The english wikipedia is shit![edit]
"Ich sage es mal auf Engtlisch damit alle es Verstehen: The english wikipedia is shit!" ChNPP those are your words as stated in an above comment of yours.
You don't know the prehistory, when you not can speak german. The article of nuclear power plants is really bullshit. The article are not well written and the are very short. To short. Other article have no sources. This is really bad. This is to negligence of other users due. And in comparison to the german wikipedia is the english WP very, very shit. That's why I work even rare in the english Wikipedia and other wikipedias in other language. The russian wikipedia is as good as the german wikipedia. But the english wikipedia.... no, i dont see a future for the english version of the project, to much bad work with important sources or articles without any source. The english wikipedia become the note F. I hope this will improve it. Greetings ChNPP (talk) 12:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That text originally came from the article on the Chernobyl Disaster incident itself, where it was even more sorely out of place. I went looking for a likely home. I agree that the RBMK article is a better place for it, thanks. Fell Gleaming(talk)15:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think, the technical description is very good, but you can add this Information in all articels of NPPs with RBMK, but thats not good. Add this information in the article RBMK, thats the best way and place for this description. Regards ChNPP (talk) 18:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm agreeing with you. I didn't add the information per se, I moved it from one article to that one. Where it was originally was even worse.
And why you cantact me on my english user page and not on my russian? This has nothing todo with my edits in the english wikipedia! ...... ChNPP (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I've noticed that you've used a local German date format (dd.mm.yyyy) on a number of pages you have edited. One such example is List of cancelled nuclear plants in the United States. (I have now edited this page.) May I suggest that you use the ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) in future edits? It's an international standard which was designed to well defined and unambiguous, which I believe is in the spirit of the Wikipedia project. For example, when I was looking at the table in the article mentioned above, I was unsure if the all the plants were closed the 1st of a month, or if all plants were closed in January, and had to consult an external source to find out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitro2k01 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nitro2k01, yes, I have used this format, because some other articles has also used this format. In further edits I can use the yyyy-mm-dd format, that's no problem. Best regards ChNPP (talk) 07:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, ChNPP. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, ChNPP. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.