Good job editing the history of alpha sig. Wanted to know if you are a current undergraduate member, or an alumni, and where. I am an alumni of the Alpha Tau Chapter at Stevens Institute of Technology. -Mkrupnic 21:30, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi Bryan, I noticed your edit to my user sub-page. Just to let you know I have a lot of work to do on that page which involves deleting a lot of the information on it. This is why there are hardly any links. It's such a big project that I haven't gotten around to it yet, but thanks for reminding me it's there! So don't worry about link fixing for me, I'm going to get rid of all links on it until it is finished anyway so that it isn't connected to other articles. Thanks anyway, --Silversmith Hewwo 08:58, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I applaud your efforts, to turn this bloated, often POV article into a valuable source of information that is both informative and relevant at the same time. I just wanted to give you a heads up that you may run into difficulties down the line from a rather unpleasant user named Faria who resisted my own attempts to whip this page into shape some time ago (the history of this can be found throughout both the talk page and history page for the OWU article as well as, I believe, in some dialogue on both of our own personal talk pages). Some of the edits you have made so far (which I believe are quite good) are similar or exactly the same as edits I made that this user continued to revert while accusing me of being a homophobe along with other nasty and unwarranted accusations. I have avoided editing the OWU page since. I hope you do not run into the same problems I did, but I just wanted to let you know that if you do, I will help in any way I can. Indrian 16:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I see you added Dirac delta function to the template. I'd say if this is to be included as a probability distribution, then it belongs in a new section of the template for pathological cases, where we might also put things like the Cantor distribution. It's certainly not continuous from an inspection of the "cdf", which not being right-continuous, is hardly a cdf at all. Actually if you want my opinion, a probability distribution must have a right-continuous cdf to be called that, but I'll leave it to the authors of Dirac delta function to decide whether they want this template attached to that article. Btyner 21:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You may be right; I wasn't sure where to put it, but I thought it belonged somewhere on the list. At least from my point of view (a physics background) the delta function is handy as a way to include discrete things when you want to express them in terms of a "continuous" distribution. In any case, I found myself hunting for information on the delta function after I had been looking at other continuous distributions, so I thought there ought to be a link in the template. But I'm no expert, so I'll leave it for the mathematicians to decide. BryanD 03:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You should add some some userboxes to your page, like these: ((User physics))((user geocaching))((User Cannabis))((User:Messedrocker/Userboxes/User Chuck Norris))-Muéro 18:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whoops, I noticed that by adding those userboxes, the categories for "people interested in physics" and likewise for geocaching now show that your talk page is a Wikipedian interested in physics and astronomy. You should probably delete the userboxes on your talk page once you read this. Muéro 18:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, but userboxes aren't really my style B-| — BryanD 23:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you happen to know how to fix the images in the alumni section of Ohio Wesleyan University? If you include them in a gallery (like they were in previus versions), they look much better but they also make the references disappear. Any suggestions on how to deal with this problem?? WikiprojectOWU 06:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Brian. I noticed that you're working on a page about physics. Right now, it's created and saved as though it's a complete article. Judging by some of the comments on the talk page, it looks like you are collaborating on a rough draft. Please consider working on it in a user sub-page, such as User:BryanD/rough drafts so that it doesn't end up in the regular article space. If you have any questions, please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks, Joyous! | Talk 23:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Bryan,

I noticed you included some of the changes suggested by another user on the FAC Candidacy. Thank you! Your help is much appreciated! My strong inclination at this point is to refrain from much susbantive changes and focus on the copyediting. user:Tony1 seems to think that this is the article's weakest point right now and this is where we should focus. I believe that any substantive changes might create further arguments and make it unstable, which we should be trying to avoid. WikiprojectOWU 05:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The way you that you corrected the saturation (or something else) of the last image looks awesome! Thank you! Do you mind correcting the other images? I am currently working on the Activism section and getting more comments from other people. WikiprojectOWU 06:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Bryan,

Thank you for adding the paragraph, which is definitely informative. I corrected the percent that was incorrect and removed the the POV language. I exchanged a few messages with one of the admins who watches out for POV language and that text would have been problemmatic. WikiprojectOWU 17:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you think that it might be informative to keep a few sentences from the pre-foudning days to set the context? WikiprojectOWU 01:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Canine Companions for Independence, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add ((hangon)) on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Knowpedia 16:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 04:29, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canine Companions for Independence is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canine Companions for Independence until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canine Companions for Independence is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canine Companions for Independence (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 16:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Canine Companions for Independence, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DGG ( talk ) 16:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, BryanD. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Ohio Wesleyan University for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]