User talk:Heron/2004H1Thanks for the additions to my power supply articles. There's so much more I could say, I don't know where to start :-) -- Alaric
I hope you did not think I was "lecturing" you though. I did not mean to :-). The very different measurement methods used across the world are quite embarrassing :-) Thanks for the help setting them. Have a very good day Heron user:Anthere
You're welcome. I've decided not to lose sleep over a semi-vowel, so I won't complain whatever the outcome. My SMPS disaster was a long time ago, but if I remember correctly, the thing blew up because there was too much ripple current in the electrolytic capacitors, causing them to overheat and boil over like gremlins in a microwave. I've been scared of SMPS ever since, but when I'm forced to use one I try to make sure it's in a metal box. I would hate to have to design another one myself, although it has got easier over the years with the introduction of new topologies and smarter control ICs. The most memorable example I've seen of the superiority of switchers over linears was the BBC Microcomputer (a British machine of the 1980s). The early units had a linear whose heat output caused the computer's plastic case to turn brown and bulge upwards over the course of a few years. Later models had a nice cool switcher, exactly the same size as the linear, that got rid of the problem. Keep on using the linears, and may you enjoy many years of explosion-free design! Regards -- Heron 19:49, 4 May 2004 (UTC) What is "switched" in an SMPS? Heavy chariot 16:28, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
Logic gateHi Heron. For the symbols on Logic gate, did you use a schematic editor? If so, does it also have the IEC symbols avialable? Talk:Logic gate rightfully requests these, and it would be cool if we had symbols with the same style. Thanks also for you work on Runt pulse. Colin Marquardt 11:14, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC) Hi. I used Microsoft Word, because the schematic editor I use at work has only the IEC symbols, which I don't like. I agree that Wikipedia needs to show both sets of symbols, but I just didn't feel like drawing them all. I have just drawn some using a schematic editor, and I'm in the process of uploading them. -- Heron Cool, thanks. Colin Marquardt Hello. It seems that you are an extremely valuable contributer to Wikipedia, but I have not made your acquaintence yet, so I will now say, "Nice to meet you.", --Alexandros 16:55, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC) You are very kind. I look forward to working with you. -- Heron 17:13, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC) County mapsHi. I note you were the kind person who supplied the county maps for various English counties. Could you please point me at the CIA source map you used as a basis? Morwen 23:37, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)
rocks and minerals projectSince you've contributed in the rocks and minerals area before, wanted to let you know that I created a WikiProject Rocks and Minerals if you'd like to join. Elf 05:04, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Fluid Power -> Hydraulics and PneumaticsBoth hydraulics and Pneumatics are sub-categories of Fluid Power. The discussion of the general principles should be in a new page Fluid Power with hydraulic and pneumatic covering specifics and referring back to Fluid Power. Your hydraulic entry stands well on its own, if you'll add a link to Fluid Power. I'm willing to tackle Fluid Power. -RatOmeter
Thai alphabetHello, Heron. Kudos for all your material on Thai topics. Do you think the table of vowels under Thai alphabet could be enhanced by adding the short vowels such as โกะ, and a column of (very) approximate pronunciations? David K 12:46, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I presume that you live in Thailand. Would this be anywhere near the mark? --KayEss 21:41, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
MicrowavesThanks for answering the question about ISM band wireless devices -- Heavy chariot 16:53, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Encypher vs. encipherHi, I replied to a comment of yours regarding the spellings of encipher and encypher at Wikipedia talk:List of common misspellings. If you have anything to add about the issue, it would be appreciated. Thanks! Wmahan. 21:38, 2004 May 3 (UTC) Vanilla vs French VanilaFrom http://www.vanilla.com/html/facts-faq.html: Q. What is French Vanilla? A. French vanilla is not a type of vanilla. It is a term used to describe an egg-custard base for ice cream. However, because it sounds exotic or romantic - especially in the perfume industry - it's often used to describe perfumes, candles and other specialty products. - Yours in inquisitiveness - UtherSRG 16:10, 25 May 2004 (UTC) Thank you. It seems my comment about "USism" in the vanilla article was wrong, so I deleted it. I have found the same meaning used in British writing, although mainly in marketing-speak. -- Heron 21:24, 25 May 2004 (UTC) I just want to make sure you realized that the transistor article was doubled a while ago ([1]) (scroll down halfway and see the picture is there again), and you deleted one half just now ([2]). I imagine different edits were made to each half, and Gwimpey said he would merge the two halves, but I guess didn't. I just don't want a bunch of edits to be lost because you thought you did the doubling just now and quickly reverted it. - Omegatron 21:34, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC) Oh. You DID do the doubling, but it was on June 3rd, not just now. I didn't realize that was you, too. Look at links 1 and 2 and their place in the history if you are confused... - Omegatron 21:36, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC) Good point, Omegatron. I'm sorry about that doubling: must have been a cut-and-paste error. I just looked at the last doubled version, before I deleted the bottom half, and the two halves were different. I am assuming that all recent editing has been done to the top half, and that the bottom half can therefore safely be forgotten. I shall check anyway, just in case my assumption is wrong. -- Heron 21:56, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) Wonderful work with Tile!It's always nice to see a stub expanded properly. Wonderful, conventional wiki-work. :-) ✏ Sverdrup 16:26, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC) Thanks for your appreciation, Sverdrup. Some credit must also go to you for that rather attractive photograph. -- Heron 16:50, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC) Your edit to CowboyThank you for editing Cowboy, but this article can still be made even better. A good article title for this is Cowhand, which is the gender-neutral term. 66.245.90.177 13:44, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC) I have some sympathy with your point, 66.245.90.177. You can change the title if you like, but I'm a Briton, so I don't feel entitled to make this judgement. ;-) -- Heron 14:12, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC) Please be carefulA few minutes ago you duplicated Cleanup. Please try to prevent this from happening. - SimonP 18:52, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)
UV historyI am glad you added a section on UV history. In fact, I would really like to know more. I never appreciated so much the intellectual powers of Henri Becquerel before. Imagine, helping to resolve the nature of the optical spectrum prenatally ;)
Seriously though, I have been thinking that a general discussion of the history of the scientific understanding of the nature of light would be very interesting. The nineteenth century seems to have been dominated by wave theories. Apparently the impetus away from Newtonian particles began with Young's experiment and the theory of polarization near the beginning of the century and ended, abruptly, with the problem of the photoelectric effect near the end. I would like to know more about how UV fits into this picture, and how the unification you mention was achieved. I believe 1842 was also around the time that light and electromagnetism were shown to be related. AJim 01:59, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
LicenseHi, you've been involved in creating the Image:Microscope diagram.png but there's no information about license. Could you tell me more ? Is it GFDL ? We use it on french wikipedia and wonder what license it is. Thanks in advance. fr:Utilisateur:Tipiac
ettiquiteI reverted your change to Talk:Switch because it's generally "not done" on Wikipedia to delete other people's comments on Talk pages, even when the comments become obsolete. Please don't be offended. -- Heron 19:48, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC) I'm not at all offended. I'm happy that someone is recovering potentially useful bits whenever they are deleted. However, I don't see why anyone needs obsolete comments. Would it be OK for me to move those comments to the Talk page of the original author (User:Huwr) ? -- DavidCary 20:56, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia