Talk:Consumer electronics

message: Should it be mentioned that nowadays some products (such as cameras, microphones and GPS) have become less common because they are integrated in smartphones?
PWNGWN (talk) 22:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Less individual products? 

message: Melody Lavender has started translating from the German page on consumer electronics, but there is also good content that can be grabbed from Czech wiki, Spanish wiki and Finnish wiki. Remember that per Wikipedia:Translation we have to tag the talk page with  so as to preserve copyright. --NickPenguin(contribs) 15:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a Finnish translator but I don't find the Finnish page particularly good. I might check it for things we may have overlooked, but in that case I'd rather dig out a proper source than go through the process of translating unsourced material. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 13:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation efforts 

message: Do with this what you will. Just did a quick search of Google news, books, scholar etc, and posted a lot of promising links to save you guys the trouble. :)--Coin945 (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Source dump

message: The timeline part of the History section in this article seems like it does, or will eventually be duplicated with the Timeline of electrical and electronic engineering and I am proposing that we condense the timeline content in this article, put a  tag on it, and merge it into the slightly broader Timeline of electrical and electronic engineering. --NickPenguin(contribs) 04:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Support: Condensing it should also mean putting it in prose. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 17:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Support but I have some doubts about the qualtiy of the machine translation. The terminology needs to be checked line by line and then it all needs to be put into prose.--Melody Lavender (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Support. I don't have a problem with the use of a condensed list format in the timeline for this article, as they're easy to read and obtain a general summary from. However, I also don't oppose a conversion to prose formatting, if anyone wants to perform this. A merge to Timeline of electrical and electronic engineering is fine for the bulk of the content. It will definitely take some time and significant work to reformat content to fit the table at the merge target, though.  NorthAmerica1000 23:11, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Support agreed, per above. ///EuroCarGT 02:43, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A look at each item in both lists reveals a few date discrepancies discrepancy, invention of the triode and invention of the iconoscope, but otherwise both lists are completely different. If it wasn't the case that one was a table and the other in text form it would be an easy merge. --NickPenguin(contribs) 05:24, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Comment I am afraid the two lists don't exactly overlap each other and merging may cause loss of some information. I prefer to leave them as they are. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it be more appropriate to split this into Timeline of consumer electronics? I feel like the timeline it taking up 80% of the article, and detracting from the overall coverage of the subject. --NickPenguin(contribs) 01:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

text: *Support split. This would work out better, and would become a valid, workable WP:SPINOUT of this article. Struck the "Support" in my comment above. NorthAmerica1000 01:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Support splitting as what NickPenguin stated. The history section is a bit long and moving it to a separate article is ideal. ///EuroCarGT 20:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Yes, that was an error on my part. I really thought that the collaboration would be an exception to that rule, but the reality was it not. In hindsight it should have been translated bit by bit, so I apologize for that. --NickPenguin(contribs) 13:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Support split. But please make sure it has some sources so that it doesn't have to be nominated for deletion straight away. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 15:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good point, without sources a new article would be deleted rather quickly. With that in mind, I am at a loss with what to do with this content, fact checking each item would be very time consuming. I am actually surprised it is permitted on DeWiki, they are usually very strict about content. I would hate to remove potentially good content, but perhaps it is better gone? I am thinking about the advice contained here. --NickPenguin(contribs) 17:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than deleting, it could be moved to an article talk page (my original "alternative to merge"), userified or moved to draft namespace. The advantage of all these namespaces (talk, user, draft) other than article is that they don't have notability and source requirements. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 22:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: In my experience, those are sometimes, but not always, soft deletions. However in this case, they would probably be preferable. I think the talk page or draft would be the best solution, userfying would likely cause the content to get lost. --NickPenguin(contribs) 23:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Much of the article, and almost all the timeline, is generally about the history of electronics rather than specifically that of consumer goods. We have other articles on electronics, which are the right places for such matters. Jim.henderson (talk) 11:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Support split - Dumping all this into Timeline of electrical and electronic engineering is not going to improve that article. Leaving it here constitutes an WP:UNDUE issue. ~KvnG 14:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

text: So, I moved it, and indeed it made that bad article even worse, while making this dreadful (and to my mind more important) one less bad.  Questions of improving the other so it will be be only as bad as I found it, or beyond, can continue at Talk:Timeline of electrical and electronic engineering.  Jim.henderson (talk) 21:23, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge timeline 

message: Consumer_electronics#History seems to claim that consumer electronics started with the transistor. Electronics industry (and our new lead from there) claims that the Receiver (radio) was the first consumer electronics product. This seems to support that contention. ~KvnG 15:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Start of history

message: The History section seems focused on the production of the electronic in devices, and does not seems to include much background on how consumers purchased, and how producers commercialised to them. Also the introduction seems rather dense, and does seem to speak a lot about markets and historical timelines. It seems reasonable to move this down, and widen History to cover wider aspects of consuming media, information and entertainment via electronic devices. If you agree, would you suggest starting with the History or the Introduction, and how should either be developed? Artemgy (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of consumption 

message: This is a big problem, and I don't know how it can possibly be fixed because of its scope, but Wikipedia is full of this word. "Consumer" means "one who consumes"and I have to wonder who's trying to consume (as in eat) electronics. In these contexts, all that is really being communicated is "it's something that people use"i.e. no useful information is being imparted. I have been trying my best to fix this but it's embedded too deep. See https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Consume (and the entry below it, consumer). While this website is mostly talking about problems with the word related to software, it's not a term that we should be wanting to use to describe ourselves in the first place. Personally, I prefer "individual", but I can understand why corporations wouldn't want us to be using a word like that... DesertPipeline (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  In this context, "consumer" is meaningless 

message: — Assignment last updated by Heinzam (talk) 19:57, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: HIST 463 Consumerism in Modern America

message: Adding the solar system to the maps for nasa and space x enthusiasts to view the planets in a 2d,3d or 4d to explore outer space and the cosmos with a single update to the maps application can give consumers the ability to see the sun, the planet’s ,stars and moons from the images captured by the telescopes K.W.N96 (talk) 00:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding the solar system to Maps