Talk:WiTricity

message: This article should be WiTricity, not Witricity,
similarly as WiFi.
--62.240.180.1 10:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There was a design for a power coupler using a two part (separable) toroidal transformer used in armaments in the 1980's - its main attraction was that any incident power arriving  was canceled by the winding opposite, making it highly suitable for dirty EMI environments found on missiles. I believe that the company did experiments for domestic applications - children could not stick pencils into the socket, so there was no risk of shock. However the project fizzled out, but maybe this could help someone close to the project to remember something relevant from the dim and distant past?Timpo (talk) 15:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hellerman Deutsch

message: I really don't understand why this document fails to mention Tesla at all. The MIT work is a direct application of his documented work. An attempt at rewriting history...   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.207.152.141 (talk) 12:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: THAT IS BS! IF TESLA INVENTED THIS 100 YEARS WHY THE  IS YOUR COMPUTER STILL RUNNING ON WIRES YOU STUPID RETARD? --62.199.168.98 (talk) 08:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

text: It already does. --soum talk 15:29, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Indeed it does reference Tesla (who did mostly failed attempts at efficient long distance wireless power transfer), but on the other hand the document also failed to mention near-field magnetically coupled Tesla coils. Quite a lot of other prior art is not mentioned, either. This actually is not surprising since the authors of the original MIT article have otherwise good backgrounds, but obviously not in basic electronics, RF design or electromagnetics, and unnecessarily re-did a lot of measurements that were done something like 100 years ago. Which is actually the main contents of their article, which reads like a final report from some student lab. No truly new developments, apart from a nice new name for the old wireless power transfer concept. Anyway I tried to Be Bold add some of those missing prior art things now. Needless to say, edit at will. Jwagnerhki 19:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If separate the primary side and the secondary side in considering about the WiTricity power transfer system, the primary side resonator and source coil, the secondary side resonator and device coil, it would be noticed that each parts are very similar to the Tesla coil. They might have been inspired by the two Tesla-coils which are closely setting.--Neotesla (talk) 03:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tesla 

message: The extent of the near-field is related to wavelength, not distance.  Thus I suggest: 
"the receiving devices must be within medium range (few meters) from the transmitter. The system uses a relatively low frequency (few MHz)." should read something like:
"the receiving devices must be no more than about a quarter wavelength from the transmitter, that is a few meters at the relatively low frequency of a few MHz used by the system."
- GilesW 23:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wavelength 

message: What is the correct pronunciation of WiTricity? It is correct to assume is pronounced like Why-tricity? Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 20:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's how they (who work down the hall from me) pronounce it.  —Steven G. Johnson (talk) 17:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: the article did sound a lot like an advertisement. imo wording like "witricity transmitters" has no place in an encyclopedia. so i removed that.
the article still doesnt quite clarify the position of witricity technologicaly.
i made a first step, by making it clear witricity is wireless energy transfer (instead of hiding the link in a description of the technology).
but i think the most important information about witricity needs to be, if witricity is just a new word for an old technology, or if its the term for a new technological incarnation of an old idea. this information needs to be spelled out.
future edits should focus to clarify what makes witricity different from other wireless energy transfer technology. or if there is none, rewrite the technological informations to clarify this is nothing "witricity specific", and witricity beeing just a new term for it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.127.97.97 (talk) 14:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  my recent changes - future of article 

message: aren't there any plans to implement technology in Pacemakers and defibrillators (so no surgery is required every 4-6 years to replace batteries ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.131.67 (talk) 09:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pacemakers and defibrillators 

message: Intel's witricity is called WREL (wireless resonant energy link) perhaps this can be included into article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.173.181 (talk) 06:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: WREL

message: WiTricity is a broadly registered trademark of John Joannopolous, not a generic term. Also, the subject is well covered in the article Wireless_energy_transfer Altaphon (talk) 17:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any verifiable sources to match that claim? The Witricity corporation claims that it is their trademark.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 17:09, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

text: OK, it does seem to be the name that registered it..- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 17:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Trademarks, and other entries

message: An article about Electrosmog energy harvesting needs to be made. Unlike WiTricity dough, the flow of electricity can't be controlled. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/10/nokia-mobile-phone
91.182.161.120 (talk) 14:37, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Energy "harvesting" was supposedly done in Berlin "Schrebergärten" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotment_%28gardening%29) in the 1930s, with a medium vawe radio transmitter as souce. Note that classic analog TV transmitters often sport tremendous wattages: "North American stations can go up to 5000 kW ERP for video" says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_station#Transmission. Which makes "harvesting" nearby very easy. --Fritz Jörn (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Electrosmog energy harvesting

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on WiTricity. 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/20081231103130/http://thefutureofthings.com/pod/250/wireless-power-demonstrated.html to http://thefutureofthings.com/pod/250/wireless-power-demonstrated.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101209070825/http://thefutureofthings.com/news/5763/intel-s-wireless-power-technology-demonstrated.html to http://thefutureofthings.com/news/5763/intel-s-wireless-power-technology-demonstrated.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:48, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The  current version of the article is highly non-neutral. It seems to be a hatchet job written on top of a pre-existing advertising brochure. I removed the derogatory content and was starting on addressing the spam, when I was reverted and accused of vandalism. , I get that you think WiTricity are up to no good, but Wikipedia is not the place for you to wage this campaign. The bulk of the stuff you added is original research or, at best, synthesis of published sources. For example, sources 16 and 17 don't even mention WiTricity; you just cite them to advance an argument for why you personally think WiTricity doesn't work. All of your personal opinions about the MIT thesis ("the MIT researchers were clearly"...) is also just that, personal opinion, and it is not supported by the cited sources. All of this nonsense needs to stop, as well as removing the maintenance tags without reason. Reyk YO! 10:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality of the article and inappropriate [[WP:SYNTH|synthesis]] 

message: Hello! On behalf of WiTricity, and as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I have drafted a new Wikipedia article to replace the existing entry. The current article is, well, in terrible shape, as evidenced by the 5 tags at the top of the page. I have to agree with the warning banners: the current article uses inappropriate sources, is overly detailed, contains original research and synthesis, and should be entirely rewritten. So I've done just that! Please see User:Inkian Jason/WiTricity.
I've worked to draft an accurate, neutral, and up to date overview of the company and its technology, based on Wikipedia-appropriate sourcing. I've disclosed my conflict of interest at the top of this page, in compliance with Wikipedia's Terms of Use, and WiTricity has verified the accuracy of the proposed draft. I'd like to think the draft is a significant improvement over the current article, but I will let volunteer editors review and implement appropriately.
 I see you've engaged in discussions above and worked hard to improve the article. But, you've also acknowledged the entry is still a mess. I'm hoping you might be willing to review User:Inkian Jason/WiTricity and copy markup over appropriately. I think you'll find the draft has an appropriate level of detail and no contentious claims. In fact, most of the claims can probably be verified by multiple reputable sources because I've taken a more conservative approach for this replacement entry. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thanks for your consideration, Inkian Jason (talk) 18:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , Hi there. I'm hardly active these days so I don't really have the time or inclination to get involved with this. Best of luck with your rewrite. Reyk YO! 11:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  No problem! Thanks for letting me know. I will seek help elsewhere. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

text:  Thanks to User:Jordano53 for updating the article. Inkian Jason (talk) 14:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draft article 

message: Hello again! On behalf of WiTricity, and as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I'd like to propose a few updates to this Wikipedia entry.
I won't be editing the article directly because of my conflict of interest, so I'd appreciate if willing volunteers could review and implement on my behalf.  I'd also like to make User:Jordano53 aware of this request per previous assistance above. Please let me know if I can answer any questions or address any concerns. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 20:37, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: , other than #2, I don't see any of the requests adding encyclopedic value, just value for the company itself. I will leave the rest for another reviewer. Wish I could have been more of assistance. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:51, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for reviewing, CNMall41. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

text: *I never like to put industry awards into articles as they are promotional. Will leave for another reviewer to decide. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Not done:  agreed, this reads overly promotional to me, and "honorable mention" doesn't reach the level of importance required to get over it.  ℰmi1y⧼T·C⧽ 11:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

text: @Inkian Jason Cheers. Duke Gilmore (talk) 11:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

text: @Inkian Jason  Cheers.  Duke Gilmore (talk) 11:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks for reviewing. Inkian Jason (talk) 14:06, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:24, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates 

message: 1. First, I'd like to propose the following addition to the History section:
: 
*I never like to put industry awards into articles as they are promotional. Will leave for another reviewer to decide. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done:  agreed, this reads overly promotional to me, and "honorable mention" doesn't reach the level of importance required to get over it.  ℰmi1y⧼T·C⧽ 11:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: 2. Next, Siemens has recently acquired a minority stake in the company, so I propose the following addition to the History section: 
*DONE 
** Thanks for updating the article here. Inkian Jason (talk) 14:06, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Siemens 

message: 3. For the Uses subsection, I suggest the following addition based on secondary coverage:
: 
 @Inkian Jason Cheers. Duke Gilmore (talk) 11:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michigan Mobility Funding Platform 

message: 4. I also propose the following update to the Uses subsection, which mentions other vehicles with WiTricity technology:
: 
 @Inkian Jason  Cheers.  Duke Gilmore (talk) 11:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genesis GV60 

message: 5. I propose adding mention of the company's Wireless Power Consortium membership:
: 
Thanks for reviewing. Inkian Jason (talk) 14:06, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wireless Power Consortium 

message: Finally, I propose adding mention of the recent licensing agreement with Wiferion to the Uses section:
:
Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:24, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiferion