Talk:List of mechanical engineers

Inclusion criteria? (early comments)

There are several people listed on this page who are clearly not mechanical engineers.

I'm removing a couple of people that are not notable WP:NN. --Alphachimp ^talk 05:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

What is the definition that governs whether someone should be on this page. obviously they have to be an engineer, I would have said that a listee needs to have a wiki page at the very least. Greglocock 20:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I have removed a few names from this list as their description on this list mentions another occupation. I am not saying they should not be listed but just not here. Keelback (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Red links

If you add an entry here that does not have a wiki page the link will show up as red. I will remove it in line with wiki policy for lists. So if you want to put someone on this list create the article for the first. Greglocock (talk) 23:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Conru

Conru does not have his own web page, his company does. He has a mechanical engineering degree. Does he belong on this list?

Andrew ConruABC News Founder of Adult FriendFinder , an entrepreneur with a doctorate in mechanical engineering design

Greg Locock (talk) 23:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

General cleanup

Re the "this is a mess" note I found when I first stumbled onto this page, I've tried to make some improvements. But I know it is still far from perfect. But, hopefully, it is no longer "a mess". There are still several heritage entries that I think should be deleted (notable in that they don't have birth/death dates), but I'll leave that for others. Plus I'm sure I've left out lots of important individuals. I have also included some individuals who may be more rightly termed "inventors" than "mechanical engineers". But if they have made notable contributions, I've erred on the side of inclusiveness given the "have practiced in" verbiage at the introduction to the page. But I would certainly have no quarrel with anyone who feels they should be deleted. Cheers, --JuniperisCommunis (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

What is the purpose of this article?

What is the focus of this article? It appears to be for people who are famous for their work in mechanical engineering? Or are they mechanical engineers who are famous in some way, not necessarily connected with mechanical engineering?

Several entrants appear to be mechanical engineers who are famous for something else such as: Boris Vian - writer Alan Kulwicki - 1992 NASCAR Champion

I question why they should be listed here. Elsewhere under writer or racing driver or whatever but NOT here surely.

Can’t have it both ways surely as many entries such as Leonardo da Vinci only comply with my first definition! Keelback (talk) 06:40, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

The lede states: "This is a list of mechanical engineers, notable people who were trained in or practiced mechanical engineering..." (my emphasis).

According to their articles, Vian was ['merely'] employed as an engineer, while Kulwicki gained a BSc in mech eng and this knowledge has been cited as a factor of his success as a racecar driver. I can't see any reason for retaining Vian, except for the inclusivity of the lede. As for Kulwicki, I haven't read enough of his article to decide. I am leaning towards the lede being changed so that it is not enough to be 'just' a mechanical engineer, or 'just' having a relevant degree. Really this article wants to list those notable for their involvement with mechanical engineering, which would probably then include many other inventors...

EdJogg (talk) 09:37, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I sort of agree. Let's start out by defining who we don't want. eg (a) crackpot inventors (b) PhD engineers who have done little else but publish their theses (c) people who did engineering at uni but made no particular use of that in an engineering field. And who do we want? (1) famous (ie notable) mechanical engineers Greglocock (talk) 00:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I did some quick cleanup of the lead per WP:LIST. Per guidelines the list lead paragraph should contain criteria for inclusion. The word "notable" is not considered a sufficient criteria - everyone in Wikipedia is notable. Lacking a def I have made one up that gives some rational to the list, "noted for their contribution to the field". This would mean the person's article references some significant contribution and it is mentioned in the lead. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 15:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)