Talk:Lean construction

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://www.msu.edu/user/tariq/Learn_Lean.html and http://www.msu.edu/~tariq/. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2007030110017186.
This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

Dear Colchicum, On 19 March 2007 at 15:48 an entry is shown under your name in the history log. You have expressed concern that the "Lean Construction" article on wikipedia does not satisfy the notability guideline or one of the following guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia: Biographies, Books, Companies, Fiction, Music, Neologisms, Numbers, Web content, or several proposals for new guidelines.

The Lean Construction research and practitioner community has been working on this topic since 1992 or so. There are numerous publications, in peer-reviewed journals and technical magazines, regarding this topic. The philosophy of Lean Construction is similar, but not identical, to the Toyota Production System, which has a wikipedia entry.

If your concern is with the companies we have listed, this has been only done to establish the widespread adoption of the principles and practice of Lean Construction. This is not meant as an advertisement for the companies. Please indicate whether this is still your concern (Tabdelhamid 11:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Ok, I am not concerned anymore. Colchicum 13:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you remove the note about the notability guideline concern?Tabdelhamid 15:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Veinor, Are your concerns about Wikifying satisfied? Tabdelhamid 18:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why the '4-hour house' is excluded from this page ? Facius 12:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Facius, if this is a wikipedia reference we can add it. The 4-hour house primarly embodies the lean maxim of off-site fabrication and JIT to facilitate site work flow.Tabdelhamid 21:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the categories that Lean Construction should be under. I removed the warning regarding lack of categorizationTabdelhamid 02:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Korny, I am not sure why you made the changes you did. The information contained on the page is necessary because it reflects the evolving and growing nature of Lean Construction. You are welcome to join the Lean Construction community next year for our conference in Salford, Britan. Visit iglc.net to learn more.

Tabdelhamid —Preceding comment was added at 19:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-inserting my changes

I'm re-inserting the changes I made, that were reverted by the author and main editor of this page. I contend my changes are valid for the following reasons:

"lean construction" is not a proper noun phrase, so it should be lowercased.
saying it's part of a "scientific revolution" is an uncited opinion, and thus original research.
the "potpourri of definitions" section is non-encyclopedic, and adds very little information to the article.
the long list of links to companies at the end constitutes linkspam.

Korny O'Near 19:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Lean Construction Seminar

I have not edited the article page in any way, but I feel it is appropriate to raise a general concern about this article.

If the aim of Wikipedia is to be an online encyclopaedic resource, then I feel this article falls some way short of that aim.

This reads to me very much in the fashion of a brochure or note-pack that would accompany a Lean Construction Seminar, and is therefore a wholly biased article submitted by a proponent of the subject.

Whilst perhaps we should thank Mr. Abdelhamid for presenting this to readers "free of charge", it is, in my opinion, not suitable as an article in its current form.

Surely it should, at least, be limited to relevant facts, and at the VERY least, the FAQ section should be removed.

I have neither the skill or knowledge to suggest how a re-write of the article should appear, but if the subject, instead of being "Lean Construction" was "House" or "France" then the article would not be written in the same style.

I accept that lean construction is a concept rather than an object, but rigorous standards should equally apply.

195.38.93.206 (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged FAQ

In my opinion, the FAQ section is not at all encyclopedic in nature. It may contain useful information, that is beyond my ability to discern.