Misplaced Pages

User talk:Wtshymanski: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:26, 18 January 2011 editWtshymanski (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users76,106 edits blow out fluff, dust, bent nails and blown fuses← Previous edit Revision as of 19:03, 26 January 2011 edit undoWtshymanski (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users76,106 edits So much for WP:IADNext edit →
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 41: Line 41:
::FYI, I did add. You censor. ] (]) 02:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC) ::FYI, I did add. You censor. ] (]) 02:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
::: I'd recommend for you to study the difference between "censor" and "edit" - dropping 2 Kbytes of random word salad in an article is not helping the project. --] (]) 02:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC) ::: I'd recommend for you to study the difference between "censor" and "edit" - dropping 2 Kbytes of random word salad in an article is not helping the project. --] (]) 02:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

== January 2011 ==

] Please ] in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on ]. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:uw-agf3 --> ] 21:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
::Demonstrably not true. Most editors are here to hurt the encyclopedia, not to help it. Look at your last 1000 edits and see how many of them are vandalism reversions, or, at best, cleaning up of text that wouldn't get a passing grade in an elementary school assignment. --] (]) 16:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
:::] Please ] other editors. If you continue, you may be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:uw-npa3 --><!-- Warning generated with Uw-npa3 template --> ] 18:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
::Oh dear Lord, have I made a personal attack? What WAS I thinking? I hereby sincerely and deeply apologize to everyone I've ever met for any injury to their frail self-esteem I may have thoughtlessly caused them. And to think, I could actually be blocked from the singular privelege of taking "poo" out of 20 articles every day. Oh, the drama! --] (]) 19:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
] Constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article ] has an ] that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use ] for any tests you may want to do. Do not use the edit summary as a soapbox, as you did when you wrote "it's a pointless endeavour even by the standards of Misplaced Pages compulsive editors" <!-- Template:uw-wrongsummary --> ] 16:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:03, 26 January 2011

Some high voltage transmission lines against a blue evening or dawn sky. Nothing to do with the caption text, which was the point of the dispute. Some editors behave as if descriptions in captions aren't supposed to be ..descriptive.
Cheese was unknown to Pre-Columbian Eskimos.

Grrr, Grr...go away

I'm an uncivil editor, I am, I am. I might dare to disagree with you. (I might even, rarely, be right).

Article discussions

If we're going to talk about article contents, please discuss on the article's talk page so everyone can see what's going on. If I've made a change, the article (and it's talk page) are on my watchlist and I'll see it. Also, discussing the article on the article's own talk page encourages anyone else who happens to be watching to chime in.

Edit warring

If you parse "official" narrowly enough, you can make it mean anything you want...though it helps to have an admin hammer to make consensus. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:37, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


Manitoba

Oh thank you, I was *so* worried I wasn't going to have permission from some anonymous person on the Misplaced Pages to have my own opinions.--Wtshymanski (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

If arrogance was petroleum, the Mideast and the tar sands would be out of business. --Wtshymanski (talk) 01:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


Electric bell

Hi Wtshymanski, I've restored the {{wikify}} tag at Electric bell because of the HTML formatted table in that particular section. I tagged this based on documentation that can be found at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikify, by clicking the link where it says "To view the old project page". I actually wasn't aware of any changes to that project page until now, and apologise if HTML-removal is no longer included as part of it. Happy editing! :)  -- WikHead (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

It's too bad that although you had no time to fix this or explain what the problem is, you had time to tag it twice and type this long explanation in lieu of a descriptive edit comment. Luckily someone else stepped in and spent the minute and a half required to fix the problem in the first place. Happy tagging, tags are easy and fun. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Sarcasm aside, I personally would have converted that to a gallery... but my intention was to allow the decision to be made by those who have written and regularly contributed to the article.  -- WikHead (talk) 16:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Not sarcasm. I often wonder why people tag articles instead of fixing problems. And what was the problem with HTML anyway? It rendered properly as far as I can see, it's a supported part of the Misplaced Pages syntax, and of all the problems the article had, obscure techno-nerd formatting issues were probably the least important. It had no bloody *references* till I spent an exhausting 7 minutes with Google Books and my own library. A mystery drive-by tagging saying "Something's wrong with this article, guess what it is while I go on with Wikiproject:Tag every article " doesn't provide other editors with any usable guidance to fix the article. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Superheterodyne receiver explanation

Schematic of a typical superheterodyne receiver.

The diagram at right shows the basic elements of a single-conversion superheterodyne receiver. From the antenna a wide range of carrier frequencies enter the RF amplifier. The mixer produces the difference of the local oscillator- and the input frequencies in addition the sum is generated. The local oscillator (LO) is the component that determines what frequency the receiver is will listen into. So a transmission at 100 MHz and local oscillator tuned to 90 MHz will generate a new intermediate frequencies (IF) at 10 MHz and 190 MHz. The following filter will only let the specific intermediate frequency (IF) pass. The demodulator is tailored to this intermediate frequency and output the signal. For audio transmissions the output is amplified and may drive a speaker. . . Because any carrier frequency that differ with the intermediate frequency from the local oscillator frequency will pass through the intermediate frequency filter. A frequency higher and one lower than the local oscillator can pass. To overcome this issue which is called image response, . . The local oscillator can be implemented with a PLL frequency synthesizer to make computer control possible.

The block diagram in the article is insufficiently explained. Could you provide a better one instead of just report "incoherent" and delete it? What specific function each step has in processing order and what frequencies goes where is missing.Electron9 (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
The above is unintelligible; perhaps a more polished explanation is in order, although I think the rest of the article does explain the function of each stage. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello it`s me again, try this one on them. It`s one I prepared earlier, as you doFrancis E Williams (talk) 20:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
So why tell me about this? Fix the article, don't debate on talk pages. All that stuff should already be in there, if it isn't, add it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 00:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
FYI, I did add. You censor. Electron9 (talk) 02:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd recommend for you to study the difference between "censor" and "edit" - dropping 2 Kbytes of random word salad in an article is not helping the project. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:List of 7400 series integrated circuits. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Misplaced Pages. Guy Macon 21:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Demonstrably not true. Most editors are here to hurt the encyclopedia, not to help it. Look at your last 1000 edits and see how many of them are vandalism reversions, or, at best, cleaning up of text that wouldn't get a passing grade in an elementary school assignment. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Guy Macon 18:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh dear Lord, have I made a personal attack? What WAS I thinking? I hereby sincerely and deeply apologize to everyone I've ever met for any injury to their frail self-esteem I may have thoughtlessly caused them. And to think, I could actually be blocked from the singular privelege of taking "poo" out of 20 articles every day. Oh, the drama! --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article Talk:List of 7400 series integrated circuits has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Do not use the edit summary as a soapbox, as you did when you wrote "it's a pointless endeavour even by the standards of Misplaced Pages compulsive editors" Guy Macon 16:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)