Talk:American Society of Civil Engineers

All of the non-working links are now active working links. And the portions that needed citations now have references.

Also, the addition of material regarding the ASCE's Katrina levee investigation makes the article much more balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldonville (talk • contribs) 22:16, 18 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Most of this article reads like it was taken from the ASCE website promo materials. The "Mission" section repeats info from the ASCE website, and references the ASCE website.

The sole purpose of the ASCE and their vaunted and mendacious infrastructure report is to increase spending on public construction projects. In a world of declining natural resources, the need for highways and such will decrease, not increase. Not every bridge is a death trap... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.67.79 (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've removed the huge amount of promotional language on this page. And added quotation marks in the mission statement section Johnathlon (talk) 23:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have rewritten the history section to incorporate secondary sources such as the Calhoun (1960) and Hunt (1897) materials ... as well as pulling other society data from their IRS form 990s... Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 18:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

This is a great article. Nothing overrepresented. Each fact was referenced with an appropriate source. MarquisJohnHall (talk) 23:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)MarquisJohnHallReply

Many thanks... Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 12:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

An anonymous user created a separate article containing the Seven Wonders of the Modern World. I just wanted to alert those that maintain this page. Technically that information should be removed from this page if the new article is retained. --Dan East 00:53, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

• The Kremlin and Red Square (Moscow, Russia)
• Mamayev Kurgan (Volgograd, Russia)

These are especially dubious and I don't see how a city square is an engineering marvel or even the statue. Ufwuct 00:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

All of the links that were non-working are now fixed.

Further, the addition of much material, properly cited, regarding the Katrina levee investigation makes this article much more balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldonville (talk • contribs) 22:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Society of Civil Engineers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100802000000/http://www.asce.org/Content.aspx?id=2147487305 to http://www.asce.org/Content.aspx?id=2147487305

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

The IEEE article is rated by WikiProject Engineering as B-class, Top-importance ... while ASCE is rated equally important, it's is only rated Start-Class ... I would propose to start editing the ASCE article along the lines of the IEEE article as a template but obviously with the ASCE content ... For full disclosure purposes, as a civil engineer, I am a member of the organization, but this is strictly a volunteer activity and I was not requested by ASCE to do this work. Nor, am I receiving any compensation for this work. Risk Engineer (talk) 16:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

In some cases, such as the controversy materials .. I went with the ASME practice of putting that material at the end of the article .. One downside of both the IEEE and ASME articles is the lack of a program overview section ...See the National Academy of Engineering as an example of the program approach. I propose reorganizing the ASCE program elements such as Publications, Education and engineering programs, etc. to go under a single overview article like NAE's. The source for this material in the current ASCE article as well as my edits from the public domain documents, the IRS form 990s which are public domain. Cheers ... Risk Engineer (talk) 18:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Previously the article had been tagged in 2011 and again in 2016 with "Multiple issues - "refimprove"|date=December 2011 ... "advert"|date=March 2016 ... I have worked to rewrite eight of the ten sections to remove promotional material as well as provide additional citations for statements. As noted elsewhere in this page, I am a member of the organization but did these edits on a volunteer basis without compensation. ASCE did not direct or otherwise guide these edits. I have made these edits strictly adhering to Wikipedia requirements that the entry on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) be neutral, free of marketing and advertorial content, and properly cited for verification of all information added to the entry. I welcome any input, edits, and feedback from the Wikipedia community in regards to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) page. As I have frequently stated when providing disclosure: if you have any questions about my editing activities, please leave me a message on my User Talk page. I am proud of the work I do and intend that my contributions always make Wikipedia better. Cheers .... Risk Engineer (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

I'm reading the section on here and I think it would be better as its own article. If not, it seems it could fit in a related Katrina article about it. – The Grid (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)Reply