Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Civil engineering

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Civil engineering This page is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCivil engineering Engineering This page is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Is there anyone watching here who has knowledge or experience in underwater concrete formwork, mixes and placement? Please ping with reply.· · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 16:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to the CE project although I have been writing on Wikipedia for over a decade about Civil Engineering. I saw that the project has been inactive for some time and want to work with others on reviving it. I started looking around for best practices in organizing and found the Project Architecture article which is impressive. Then there is Electrical Engineering. Of the two of them, the Architecture has what I would offer is a good template to reorganize the CE project. The project scope as currently written talks about topics but not buildings or structures. This is a tough constraint to put on Civil Engineers. In fact, the current categorization has a number of categories that structures. The Electrical engineering project has a good scope statement:

"The project generally considers any article related to Electrical engineering to be within its scope.

The Architecture project scope is ...

"This WikiProject aims to:

Thoroughly explore architecture, buildings, construction globally and historically.

Improve articles about architecture, architects, buildings and construction.

Provide a place to discuss common issues on architecture, buildings, construction related pages.

Organise and categorise Category:Architecture

Ensure all pages meet the standards of Wikipedia:Cite sources. See also WikiProject Fact and Reference Check.

Develop standards and templates for architecture, buildings, construction related articles.

Manage editing of the Architecture WikiPortal

Taking the best of both projects, this is proposed as a new scope.

"The WikiProject generally considers any article related to Civil engineering to be within its scope. It also aims to:

Thoroughly explore civil engineering practice and history, globally and primarily in North America.

Improve articles about civil engineering, civil engineers and their projects.

Provide a place to discuss common issues on civil engineering, civil engineers and their projects related pages.

Organise and categorise Category:Civil Engineering

Ensure all pages meet the standards of Wikipedia:Cite sources. See also WikiProject Fact and Reference Check.

Develop essays, standards and templates for civil engineering, civil engineers and their projects related articles.

Thanks, in advance for your comments. Risk Engineer (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Does anyone know if ESIS are a notable organisation please? And does this draft article have any glaring errors/omissions: Draft:European Structural Integrity Society
Many thanks, 1292simon (talk) 09:15, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers 1292simon. I did a reference check and they have published over thirty books since 1978 as well as collaborating with other European and American organizations. The page could be organized a little better and more third party references added rather than ESIS material used. I would recommend the following:

• Remove the technical committee material
• Rework the presidents into an infobox at the bottom of the page such as the ASCE article.

Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 15:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks Risk Engineer, I really appreciate all your help with this. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 00:28, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best to you, let me know if you need more help. Risk Engineer (talk) 13:00, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch-gravity_dam

contains the sentences

    An arch-gravity dam or arched dam is a dam with the characteristics of both an arch dam and a gravity dam. It is a dam that curves upstream in a narrowing curve that directs most of the water pressure against the canyon rock walls, providing the force to compress the dam. It combines the strengths of two common dam forms and is considered a compromise between the two. 

I think this last sentence would be better to state that the design is an amalgam of the arch & gravity dam designs. Meaning that it combines the best qualities of both and eliminates the disadvantages. Calling it a compromise suggests that it still gives up some good qualities and keeps some of the bad. I could edit it as

    It combines the strengths of two common dam forms and is considered an amalgam between the two

but this doesn't read so well, since it implies a subjective opinion. How about this?

     The design of an arch-gravity dam is an amalgam of the arch dam and gravity dam designs. It is a dam that curves upstream in a narrowing curve that directs most of the water pressure against the canyon rock walls, providing the force to compress the dam. This maximizes the strength of the dam while minimizing the amount of material necessary to construct it.

This sentence here doesn't look accurate:

      However, curving a gravity dam may make it look stronger, but some of this effect may be psychological factors in operation in making a choice of dam style.[6]

I don't know the reference, but the horizontal curved slice really does translate the compression-force of the water along the shape of the curve, which would buckle any other shape.

Does this editor sign their work?... Risk Engineer (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After years and years of people proposing it basically uncontested on the talk page but it never getting actioned, we've finally added |public_transit= to {{Infobox building}}. There are 22,000 transclusions, so there's plenty of work for any of you who want to start using it; feel free to pick your favorite buildings and add the information for them. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:07, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The section of the Floodplain article on flood control has been tagged since March 2019 as needing attention from an expert in civil engineering, but I'm not sure this was called out on the civil engineering Wikiproject pages. Inviting your attention to it now. It may just be a matter of verifying the unsourced material already present and adding citations of reliable sources, but perhaps new material is also needed for proper coverage. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Civil Engineering WikiProject! I have just completed a major contribution to the Chézy formula page as part of a WikiEdu course. It's an article that was flagged as needing help to improve it from a stub by this WikiProject, so I wanted to update y'all on the progress made. I think it is much improved and the quality scale could be reassessed. I'm still very new to Wikipedia editing, but please feel free to edit or change anything you'd like there. Thanks! Katiejill127 (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you dig a tunnel under a mountain, does it become a mountain pass? I wouldn't think so, but that's how the Paso Internacional Los Libertadores tunnel and border crossing is described. There is a pass nearby, but it has its own article. GA-RT-22 (talk) 15:19, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this particular route may count as a pass, as from either side it is the uppermost section of a long ascent to a high mountain crossing (it would be different if it was a lower-level tunnel under a mountain range). Tunnelled or partially covered sections are common on high mountain routes, often being excavated to avoid extensive, exposed, dangerous, costly or unfeasible alternative routes. In Europe, I have also walked high level routes where 'passes' have included short tunnels that avoid narrow and exposed high ridges. Interesting question though.... Paul W (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow editors, greetings! I see a need of forming a new article for Geomatics engineering whose scope is increasing and article is yet to be made on wiki. Even Survey engineering can be redirected here. Being a subject of paramount importance and related to this wikiproject I would like to bring it to your kind notice. I would love to assist in the mean process as and when needed but being a civil engineering student I might not be able to accomplish this on my own having been unknown of various terms used. Franked2004 (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was a separate article at one time. A merge was proposed and rejected in 2010, then apparently proposed again in 2013 although I can't find the discussion, and it was finally merged in 2016. The current section at Geomatics has very few sources. I suggest working on that first, and doing the split when that section is in better shape. Never mind, I see the decision has already been made. GA-RT-22 (talk) 20:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Example would be HS2, as such will break many records for longest high speed railway bridge in the world. Most employment opportunities for single project in 21st century. A few Guinness W records too Ashattock (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buro Happold has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please note that Jetty, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:William Rankine#Requested move 5 July 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:36, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:William Rankine#Requested move 5 July 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 07:34, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page Building-integrated fog collectors has been recently created as part of a class project. It needs review by experts in the area, as there is a lot of information being added whose accuracy needs verification as important. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:09, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]