This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2013 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:University of Oklahoma/History of Science from Antiquity to Newton (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Talk Page[edit]

Introduction[edit]

This is my talk page. Please click "New Section" shown above to leave a message. Here is how to add "my sandbox" feature to my account profile, and here is my default sandbox

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Petesimon2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Howicus (talk) 02:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, nice assessment...you've caught what I think are the main problems with that article. Good luck with the class, and I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Howicus (talk) 02:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History of Science, College Course at OU Norman[edit]

I am enrolled in a History of Science 3103 college course at the University of Oklahoma, in Norman Oklahoma. Here is the course page on Wikipedia.

Chosen article to improve[edit]

Corpuscular Theory of Light

Bibliography (list of relevant sources)

see Talk page for Corpuscular Theory of Light
I may be working on this article in my default sandbox

Review of two articles of other student in my college course/class[edit]

I will review two of the articles shown on my course's page. Here is a Guide to reviewing of articles in Wikipedia, on Wikipedia. My professor suggests that we students perform a "copy-edit" kind of review of the articles. There is another copy-edit guide here.

list of proposed articles to work on for project was here, but now erased. [history)][edit]

Comment from the professor of my History of Science course[edit]

Hi. These all seem like interesting topics. I don't know anything about Maatkare Mutemhat, so I'm curious about the connection with HSCI (as opposed to history more broadly). There should be plenty of sources for each of these, so I'll leave the final choice up to you. Thanks, Kirwanfan (talk) 19:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

review from loured36[edit]

Hey Petesimon2, I've reviewed your article today, so I'll let you know what I think! I'll start off with easy things like grammar and organization:

In your first sentence, a comma will make it more clear: In optics, the corpuscular theory of light, arguably set forward by Pierre Gassendi and Thomas Hobbes, states that light...
This mechanical philosophy was based on Epicureanism and his atomism, in which everything in the universe, including a person's body, mind, soul, even thoughts were made of atoms--very small particles of moving matter...
Gassendi tried to explain aspects of matter and natural phenomenon of the world in terms of atoms and the void. --I'm not sure why this is italicized... be sure to use " for quotation marks and for italicized (two separate apostrophe's)
Be sure your source on your list in the section on Gassendi is attached to the end of the list and not the front of the next sentence.
Corpuscularian theories, or corpuscularianism, are similar to the theories of atomism, except that atoms were thought to be indivisible, while corpuscles could in principle be divided.
In your section on Isaac Newton, it is probably best to refer to the theory by name at the start, rather than beginning with "it was largely developed by Newton..."
are the two listed items after the quote from Einstein supposed to be part of the quote? they seem tacked on the end, and the origin of them is not apparent.

The information you have is good, though you could probably elaborate on the conflict between wave and particle theories more. I think you could use more pictures on the upper part of the article; it seems a little bare at the moment. I like the organization of the article as a whole, though there are some small issues with location of citations and bullet points, but those are not hard to fix. It would be nice to see the introduction filled out a little more, so it gives a more complete idea of the theory and leads the reader into the rest of the article.

Altogether, the article looks pretty nice. Another week of tuning up and you'll be in great shape! Keep up the good work! Loured36 (talk) 04:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Physics Newton's corpuscular theory of light Science eLearnin youtube video.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Physics Newton's corpuscular theory of light Science eLearnin youtube video.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:48, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Sir Isaac Newton and Christiaan Huygens, Pioneers in Visible Light Physics.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Sir Isaac Newton and Christiaan Huygens, Pioneers in Visible Light Physics.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Reflection of light explained by both the particle and wave theories.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Reflection of light explained by both the particle and wave theories.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Red Army Standard Ammunition has been accepted[edit]

Red Army Standard Ammunition, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

JustBerry (talk) 06:52, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Red Army Standard Ammunition, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages English and Russian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited the links in the Red Army Standard Ammunition article to reflect my real intent, going to the English language and Russian language pages respectively. Petesimon2 (talk) 21:09, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Berlin International Film Festival may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

''For other uses, see [[Silver Bear (disambiguation)]])''

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:30, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barnaul Cartridge Plant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berdan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:American Tactical Imports (July 28)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

.

To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Libby norman (talk) 00:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Petesimon2, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Draft:American Tactical Imports concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:American Tactical Imports, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:American Tactical Imports[edit]

Hello Petesimon2. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "American Tactical Imports".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:American Tactical Imports}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 20:22, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Petesimon2. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

rename the article[edit]

rename the article User:Панн/Volga State University of Water Transport --Панн (talk) 09:13, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Petesimon2. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These corpuscles are perfectly elastic, rigid, and weightless.[7][edit]

Hi Pete I was looking in the Opticks and I can't find the quote above for which Opticks is given as a reference. In fact I can't find any exposition of a corpuscular theory of light. He refers to rays, and his ideas are compatible with a particle theory, and studiously avoid taking up any wave theory, but no sign of corpuscles of light. Steve 1635 (talk) 13:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]