Revision as of 21:42, 16 July 2008 editWtshymanski (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users76,122 edits fix errors← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:34, 19 July 2008 edit undoCmprince (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,193 edits →vacuum tube manufacturers: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
::Well then fix it, don't revert. Sheesh, now I gotta do it all over again. ] (]) 21:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | ::Well then fix it, don't revert. Sheesh, now I gotta do it all over again. ] (]) 21:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
:::How about I fix it, as you are obviously far too busy. --] (]) | :::How about I fix it, as you are obviously far too busy. --] (]) | ||
== vacuum tube manufacturers == | |||
Hi Wtshymanski, | |||
Thanks for re-adding the content outside the applications section. However, I would contend that information being usable and being encyclopedic are two different characteristics. Indeed, your user page lists "big dumb lists" and "wikipedia is not a parts catalog" as "considered harmful." I think the context of the article makes it clear that tubes are still being made; it shouldn't be necessary to itemize the companies that manufacture them, though. Just my two cents. ] (]) 05:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:34, 19 July 2008
Binary Prefixes
- One thing I've learned...stick to your guns. --Wtshymanski 17
- 47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Huh?
I came across the indecipherable text in the superheterodyne article and did my best to post a single clear explanation of how it works. You reverted it all back to the indecipherable version, with a single comment that appears to be about grammar? Please explain. Maury (talk) 18:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- "Highly tuned amplifier" I thought was even more indecipherable. The explanation left out the mixer, which is the essence of a superheterodyne receiver. The overview should explain why the extra trouble and expense of a superheterodyne circuit is justified. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- Well then fix it, don't revert. Sheesh, now I gotta do it all over again. Maury (talk) 21:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- How about I fix it, as you are obviously far too busy. --Wtshymanski (talk)
- Well then fix it, don't revert. Sheesh, now I gotta do it all over again. Maury (talk) 21:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
vacuum tube manufacturers
Hi Wtshymanski,
Thanks for re-adding the content outside the applications section. However, I would contend that information being usable and being encyclopedic are two different characteristics. Indeed, your user page lists "big dumb lists" and "wikipedia is not a parts catalog" as "considered harmful." I think the context of the article makes it clear that tubes are still being made; it shouldn't be necessary to itemize the companies that manufacture them, though. Just my two cents. Cmprince (talk) 05:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)