# Talk:Constant k filter

This review is transcluded from Talk:Constant k filter/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
This article deserves GA status. It is well written, neutral, stable and well referenced with in-line citations. The author has done a great job trying to explain this very specific topic to non-specialists. A number of minor problems has been fixed during the review, as documented below. Materialscientist (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Really? I just read the whole thing and still have no idea what "k" is. 206.205.33.194 (talk) 14:06, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

The phrase image method is not sufficiently developed.
It's used in the first and last paragraphs.  It is an important concept.
In its first use the word image is linked to image impedance.
Image impedance is not an image method.
What caught my attention is the need to "bare a concept in mind" closely related to it.
Quoting section 4 

"It should be borne in mind that the characteristics of the filter predicted by the image method are only accurate if the section is terminated with its image impedance."
Be There Do That (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)cpiral

There is also composite image filter, an article that did not exist at the time this one was written, which is more aimed at the practicalities of using the method, and could be linked instead.  Image impedance might not be equal to the image method but the image impedance article certainly explains the foundations of the method.  The particular point you quote is covered in the image impedance article but there is now also image filter end terminations which explores this problem in more detail. Again, it is an article that could be linked here but did not exist at the time of writing. SpinningSpark 20:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)