Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronics/Archive 4

message: If WikiProject Electronics does get too large, I suggest the following spin-offs:
* WikiProject Cellphones Mobile
* WikiProject MP3 Players DAP/Portable media Wikipedia:WikiProject Retailing (see "Scope" sub-discussion below). --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I will report that articles related to digital audio players are in both the Electronics and Computing WikiProjects (ie. Talk:iPod nano, Talk:iPod classic, Talk:iPod touch, Talk:Zune, Talk:Creative ZEN, Talk:SanDisk Sansa, Talk:iriver clix, etc.), and  cellphone articles are within the scope of any WikiProject. At least a WikiProject related to consumer electronics would be fine, and enough support is given, individual WPs to cellphones and DAPs/PMPs (or portable devices in general). --Jw21/PenaltyKillah(discuss•edits)'NUCKS:5-6-0 19:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister WikiProjects? 

message: From the discussion above, I would suggest specifically not including any consumer electronics in the scope of this WikiProject.  My thought is that this WikiProject would benefit from remaining largely dedicated to the technical aspects of electronics and "non-consumer" electronics. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I will report that articles related to digital audio players are in both the Electronics and Computing WikiProjects (ie. Talk:iPod nano, Talk:iPod classic, Talk:iPod touch, Talk:Zune, Talk:Creative ZEN, Talk:SanDisk Sansa, Talk:iriver clix, etc.), and  cellphone articles are within the scope of any WikiProject. At least a WikiProject related to consumer electronics would be fine, and enough support is given, individual WPs to cellphones and DAPs/PMPs (or portable devices in general). --Jw21/PenaltyKillah(discuss•edits)'NUCKS:5-6-0 19:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope of WikiProject Electronics 

message: I keep trying to add something to regulator pages but it keeps getting reverted. I would like to discuss this, because I do not believe it to be "spam" yet everyone who reverts it keeps marking it as such. I am opening this to the general community.
I firmly believe that mentioning the number 1 supplier worldwide with a link (I will be happy to provide a resource) is not spam. Voltage regulators are not merely theoretical objects, they exist and are sold on a daily basis. As such, a link to a suppliers webpage is relevant as a reference to what regulators are available at present. It also gives an idea of what parameters are important and what average parameter values might be (by looking at the datasheet). Spam is when a user tries to put something on a page as vandalism or advertisement. Wikipedia is an information source, and providing information about reality is not spam! I will not revert unless I get support, but I do believe that this is realistic.--Lagrangian 17:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vendor Reference

message: There were no major changes on the main page for quite a long time: so I think we are ready for the "official" version of the project. We might move the tables of standard symbols on their own page and remove the "draft" comment at the beginning. Anything to say about it?? Alessio Damato 11:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What exactly are we going to have on the main page?--Light current 18:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  whatever you think that could be useful. We'll keep all the other parts plus, just like we did for the part about circuits, we'll move the tables of standard symbols on another page, keeping a clear link on the main one. Whatever you want to change or improve, just do it! Alessio Damato 10:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

text: If we move the tables of symbols, there will not be much left. But I suppose it doesnt matter-- leaves room for other things--Light current 03:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  or we could leave just one of the tables, the most important one, with a clear link at the end saying "more": this would leave more things on the main page, still keeping it tidy. Alessio Damato 19:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes good idea for a start.--Light current 22:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  We are definitely ready 

message: Most things in :Category:Australian_electronics_retailers are stubs. --Adam1213 Talk + 00:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stubs... 

message: This group may be interested in two mergers I proposed to move into the Semiconductor article. Please discuss at Talk:Semiconductor if any concerns/suggestions/objections. -- The Photon 06:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed mergers on [[Semiconductor]]

message: ISThere a guideline about LISTS in these articles?  I found several articles in which lists had been simply alphabetized.  I suggest that lists of examples should instead be organized to lead the reader through the relevant concepts, rather than being blindly alphabetized. For example, ANTENNAS (or ANTENNAE) might have the list in order of complexity and functional development, like:
* Simple dipole
* Biconic dipole
* phased array
* yagi antenna
* Parabolic reflector
* waveguide feed
and so forth.  Many users have no idea of the relationship of the items in such a list. Comments?? 
 Terry King  Terry King 19:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are talking about overall organisation of articles, please see my post above below.--Light current 05:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Those should probably all be removed and replaced by a link to Category:Antennas or something — Omegatron 08:25, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Category or one summary style page with Main page links to all the different sorts of antennas?--Light current 10:57, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  QUESTION: 

message: Suggestions for what the main page of a series of articles should be called. Please add more!--Light current 19:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming of 'Topic' pages 

message: Heron, If it could be done, how would you feel about a 'speed menu' (series listing) at the top RH corner of the page that could be turned off or on by the reader for whizzing around the topics in Electronics?--Light current 02:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It might work, if the content were carefully chosen and limited to a few links, if every article were free to have one or not have one depending on the consensus of editors of that article, and if the boxes were easy to change without editors having to study advanced template theory or edit other meta-pages.  They could replace, or partially replace, the 'see also' section, so that there would be no net increase in clutter, and then they might be a good thing.  I would still be very cautious about it, and suggest trying it with one or two articles first. --Heron 20:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speed menu 

message: Does anyone know whats happened to these. They seem to have disappeared!--Light current 02:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project page archives 

message: Is anyone else still working on this project?--Light current 05:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am! Roger 04:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hellooooooo! 

message: Hey, how do you join a wikiproject? Please answer on my talk page.
:I would if I knew who you are!--Light current 22:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: Domestic AC power plugs and sockets is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 23:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Domestic AC power plugs and sockets]]

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 00:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Marked by bot as needing Wikification: This article redirects to another article, which at first glance looks quite well wikified. Does the bot need adjustment? Cbdorsett 08:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Byzantine Failure 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 18:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: can some one develope a more complite list of Hotlist of Electronics. Srinivasasha 03:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hotlist of Electronics|Hotlist of Electronics]] 

message: Hey.  I've recently been doing alot of work on the portal.  Anyone's more than welcome to lend a hand or have a say.  Joe  I 02:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes we did attempt a portal before, but now I think is the right time for it! 8-)--Light current 06:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Portal

message: Hi, please comment at Talk:Electrical engineering about a page move to this project, specifically: Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronics to Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronics and Electrical Engineering.  Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 16:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Electrical engineering talk

message: Hey.  This project is in need of an assessment department.  I hope no one disagrees, cause I'm off to start it now. :) Please find the time to help update talk page tags when you can.  I know this project has many many many articles.  Joe  I 04:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I believe I set everything up correctly.  I changed  to add the assessment functions and started Assessment, not to mention all the categories contained within.  Please recheck my work, as I only copy and paste from another project.  Joe  I 04:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronics/Assessment|Assessment]]

message: Hey, anyone have concerns about letting User:WatchlistBot go thru the cats and tag articles?  It's very thorough and reliable, just not sure if the cat structure is up to it.  Joe  I 02:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WatchlistBot's author here. All the category structure needs for the bot to work properly is to have most categories have only electronics articles in it. The bot would first traverse the category hierarchy to find all electronics categories (I may need to ask for your help with that if it's not obvious to me). If there are a lot of categories that are not obvious, I can generate a list and let you pick the ones that belong in the project. Then, all articles in all tagged categories get tagged. If there's one top-level category (perhaps :Category:Electronics?) that's enough for me to start. If there are categories with some electronics articles but not all, it can be handled two ways. 1) The category is not tagged, and relevant articles are tagged by hand. 2) The category is tagged, and irrelevant articles are excluded (there will be a page in the bot's user-space to list excluded articles). Leave a note on my talk page if/when you want me to get started. Ingrid 21:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, well, seeing no objections, let's get this started.  :Category:Electronics would be the place to start.  There may be a few articles in other places, but they should be few and far between.  Please check over  for me, make sure everything's ok there.  And add links on the front page to relevant watchlistbot pages. Thanks Ingrid :)  Joe  I 06:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article tagging

message: I don't want to start a turf war or endless debate.  If there isn't a clear consensus quickly, we're dropping it and just using the current ad hoc style.
I was wondering if we could standardize on the preferred resistor symbol.  There's the squiggly American style and the boxy Euro style.  I kind of like the squiggle better, but I don't care either way, but I don't want to draw all my schematics in both styles.  It would be better if we just agreed on a "preferred" style, and when new diagrams are created, they can use that style.
Possible reasons why one might be preferable to the other:
* International standards?
* One is vastly more common
* Ability to use squiggle for resistance and box for generalized impedance in the same circuit?
Ideas? — Omegatron 23:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the squiggly lines for pure resistances and the box for general impedances. Roger 16:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense to me. The box would then represent some combination of resistance and capacitance and/or inductance, which would otherwise be represented by multiple symbols. HeirloomGardener 16:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, thats right. If we all agree then we could make that our standard. If I recall correctly, there are a few articles that don't use this convention that should probably be modified. Roger 04:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I also like the squiggly for pure resistances and the box for complex impedances.  Of course, I'm also in the US. -- mattb 15:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Certainly there's no restriction.  The language is "preferred"; not "required".  The purpose is for people like myself who don't have a favourite, and want their images to be as consistent and helpful for the project as possible.  When I go to make an image, I think "which symbols should I use", and I want that answered for me.  — Omegatron 17:23, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That's the stupidest comment I've heard for a while.  Are you seriously trying to claim that Apollo 11 would not have reached the moon if its designers had not used squiggly lines for resistors?  Or perhaps your view is that the opinion of Europeans doesn't count because they are not Americans.  By the way, I like squiggly lines better as well, although I tend not to use them nowadays. SpinningSpark 19:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resistor symbol 

message: Hi. I'd like to create an article on transistor small signal models, but Klunky is giving me a hard time (no dependent sources). Is anyone willing to help me out by drawing them in Xcircuit or something? I'm looking to expand the brief section in the BJT article to include the hybrid-pi, T, etc. models. Anyone interested? Also, can someone comment on this? Roger 02:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try to help, but I haven't much time, so I'll take care only of the drawings. Tell me what you want; if you provide lower quality diagrams, from outside Wikipedia as well, I'll try to re-draw them better. I'll use Xcircuit. Alessio Damato 08:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone help draw a few schematics for a new article? 

message: Your comments would be welcome. — BillC  talk 10:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Transformer]] at [[Wikipedia:Peer review/Transformer/archive1|peer review]] 

message: Electronic amplifier has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electronic amplifier FAR 

message: What is the basis for adding pages to this project?  Most of the topics have nothing to do with electronics. Is this a result of a mad 'bot? It makes the list useless if it's full of randomness...--Wtshymanski 17:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pages needing attention needs attention

message: Hi, come and help add to this table. --Sadi Carnot 17:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[People_known_as_the_founder,_father,_or_mother_of_something#Technology|Fathers of electronics]]

message: ::--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion: Stiffening capacitor 

message: :: updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed deletion: Geforce 9150

message: Hello, there I happened to see you are having slight trouble getting SVG images of circuits.  Let me explain an alternate way that also should preserve text.  
*Required software only GUIs, (no script editing):
:That Software you use Xcircuit 
:Ghostscript 
:GsView 
:The development version of Inkscape  (make sure you get the development version not the stable one or it won't work)
:Winrar or 7zip to extract Inkscape from the archive.
*Steps:
:Extract the development version of Inkscape to a folder somewhere
:Install all the other aforementioned software
:Make your circuit in your Xcircuit program thing, save as PostScript
:Open the file in Ghostview
:Click File->Convert, choose pdfwrite from the first list, choose an appropriate resolution, save with .pdf extension
:Run inkscape.exe from the folder you extracted it to in the first step (make sure you are using the dev version, not the stable release
:Open the pdf file
:Save as SVG
:...
:PROFIT
Note it's still only the development version of Inkscape so don't be surprised if there are the occasional bugs or unexpected results
:Jackaranga 04:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Having trouble with SVG ?  Possible solution. 

message: See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 20#Category:Power_Standards. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Power Standards 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion: MG9073S 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 17:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article for deletion: Screen connections 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion: EX600 

message: I noticed that the "Transistor" article is no longer listed as a vital article. Does being a vital article mean it is an important electronics topic, or does it have something to do with the quality of the article? --Gerry Ashton (talk) 23:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Transistor]] not a vital article? 

message: Currently there are 2 identical sections on clockless CPUs.
One section in History of general purpose CPUs, and an identical section in CPU design.
This unintentional WP:CFORK is entirely my fault.
What should we do about it?
On Talk:CPU_design#clockless_CPUs, R. S. Shaw suggests that perhaps clockless CPUs belong in some other, third article.
Any suggestions?
Perhaps asynchronous circuit?
(Is there a better place to ask this kind of question than "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronics"?)
Is "clockless CPUs" notable enough for an entire Wikipedia article of its own?
--68.0.124.33 (talk) 04:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  clockless CPU 

message: The Academic Journals wikiproject is collaborating on Electrical Experimenter this week, and it would be good if some domain experts and enthusiasts could either assist or simply mention factoids on the talk page.  If anyone has physical copies of this magazine that are in the public domain, it would be great if you could scan a few pages, upload them to Commons, and note the availability on our "Transcription" page. Cheers, John Vandenberg (talk) 08:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stepping back in time 

message: * What about Direct Toner Method article? links: , and so on; Images... from flickr: . is it reasonable? :) Berserkerus (talk) 18:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct Toner Method 

message: Please vote at Talk:Eb/N0#Survey on which unit to be be used at Wikipedia for measuring  Spectral efficiency. For a background discussion, see Talk:Spectral_efficiency#Bit/s/Hz and Talk:Eb/N0#Bit/s/Hz.
Mange01 (talk) 07:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey: bit/s/Hz, (bit/s)/Hz or bit·s<sup>−1</sup>·Hz<sup>−1</sup> as [[Spectral efficiency]] unit? 

message: Hi, we need some expertise at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_May_3 (look for XtremeData title) to help assess the notability of the XtremeData company and see if the article should be undeleted or at least brought to AfD to discuss the sources. Basically, we are not sure if it's a notable FPGA manufacturer or just a minor one. Please answer there and not here. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion Review of XtremeData (FPGA manufacturer) 

message: I've read through dozens and dozens of technology-related entries (I'm not in the field) and it is standard practice to define an acronym or abbreviation the first time it is used in a written piece. I've printed out the 18 page, single-spaced, list of computer and technology abbreviations but a lot of acronyms are still frequently used that don't even appear on this long, long list. YOU might know what these letter combinations mean but the average reader (who is not an engineer or computer programmer) does not. Some entries are just abbreviations strung together with some filler words and you'd need a Ph.D. to decipher what the hell they mean. You can communicate an idea to a layperson without "dumbing" it down, just realize you are writing for readers who do not have the same technical degrees you have. If they did, they wouldn't be going to Wikipedia for answers to their questions.Nwjerseyliz (talk) 10:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Pointing to some examples instead of ranting might possibly succeed in getting something done about it. SpinningSpark 23:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plea from a reader

message: Many of the articles related to Pinouts have a variety of external links to sites showing various pinouts. Has any consensus been developed as to these kinds of external links? It seems to me that it is pointless having 5 links to much the same info, but I don;t particularly want to pick one myself. Kevin (talk) 22:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pinouts external links 

message: An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ?  " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. --  TinuCherian     (Wanna Talk?)   - , member of WikiProject Council.  14:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A discussion 

message: Currently, 290 articles are assigned to this project, of which 107, or 36.9%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of .) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:
:{{}}
If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles flagged for cleanup 

message: I would be interested to know whether User:Spinningspark speaks for the entire WikiProject when making this edit, indicating that this project has elected not to use the new C-Class assessment; as I can find no archived discussion amongst this project's members to reach this conclusion.  Any thoughts? Happy‑melon 20:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I opted the project out for the very reason that there had been no discussion here to take part. SpinningSpark 20:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am aware of that.  That does not mean you represent the views of the entire project; it simply means that you are the only member of the project to have expressed your views on the subject.  I'm keen to hear others do so. Happy‑melon 21:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  C-Class 

message: An IP user has recently added your project's banner to Talk:Universal Product Code, along with several others and other talk page banners. If this article is really in your project's scope, please rate it; otherwise please remove the banner. Thanks! Anomie⚔ 21:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Universal Product Code in your project's scope? 

message: Can we have the list of members on a subpage?  It would look a lot less cluttered and is not information that's needed daily by the project.  The robot outputting to the task list section could also do with being on a subpage, but I cannot do it as I have no idea how to control the robot (or even which robot it is). SpinningSpark 18:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe a better strategy would be to have Project users add the Template:User WikiProject Electronics template to their user page and add a Category within the template for this WikiProject (or its users). Then displaying pages within that category would be a list of users. Those users who don't want to add the electronics button to their user page could just add the category instead (or a tinier template — that way the category name could be easily changed later). — TedPavlic | (talk) 19:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The category is a good idea, I think.  Do you want to go ahead and do it?  It would need putting in the big template as well.  The trouble is, not all members are using it (including me) and we can't really go round adding the category to existing user pages without permission.  New members are a bit easier, just need some suitable words on the project page recommending they do it.  So all in all I think the list should remain, besides, introducing yourself here gets some interaction.  Projects are meant to be collaborations, they are useless if all people do is stick a notice on their userpage and then carry on working alone.  Oh, and welcome to the project by the way. SpinningSpark 21:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that populating the existing template with a category might tick off existing users. Additionally, I think I saw an existing category called "WikiProject Electronics members" or something, and that makes me think that once upon a time this idea had already been tried and was thrown out. Additionally, you're right about being notified about a new user... So I think you convinced me that the template is not a great idea. So go ahead and make the user page a subpage. It will give users practice at editing/using subpages, and that's a good thing regardless. — TedPavlic | (talk) 00:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you misunderstood me slightly.  I was not saying adding a category to the template is a bad idea (I think you have a good idea), I was saying directly adding a category to members' userpages who are not using the template is a bad idea.  You are right the category exists already - good catch - its :category:WikiProject Electronics members.  It is populated from :template:User WP Electronics which is different from the template on the project page :template:User WikiProject Electronics.  I cannot find anything in the archive project talk or the template talk pages discussing this.  I think maybe that template has just been overlooked, it seems to have other benefits as well, such as a wikilink to the project page. SpinningSpark 09:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of users 

message: It would be great if a few experts in the field would look this article over. It certainly seems a most exciting issue, as the size of the article, its content, the strong opinions and some mentioned sources on the talkpage suggest that Tesla's concept of wireless energy transmission of industrial-level electric energy was and remains very feasible, but especially as they all suggest that Tesla obviously knew about stuff such as waves in plasmas, magnetohydrodynamics, the ionosphere, ELF transmission communication, intentional telluric current, Schumann resonances, planet earth's self-capacity and its use as a cavity resonator, and Zenneck waves as far back as around and shortly before 1900, and that his only problem was financial support as soon as his entrepeneur investors found out that he intended to provide free electricity out of thin air for everyone on earth as a quasi-socialist public service; J. P. Morgan asked Tesla, "Where do I put the meter?", but Tesla neither knew nor cared. --80.187.125.4 (talk) 21:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wardenclyffe Tower]] 

message: Can someone take a look at the /Categories/ subpage's talk page? I've made some comments about using something like Special:CategoryTree to automate the generation of that page, but that would require some super WPE category that we'd have to make sure every category belonged to. — TedPavlic | (talk) 12:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories subpage 

message: There is a dispute at Talk:Additive_synthesis on whether the sinusoidal definition (3) should be treated as the main definition in the article, and a third opinion would be welcome. Olli Niemitalo (talk) 10:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Additive synthesis]]