Talk:Buck converter

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Constant314 in topic Poorly selected intro image
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buck converter. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Buck converter. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:10, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Figure "3 A buck converter" (Photo of a buck converter PCB)

edit

I'm frankly not a fan of that photo. It's a complex system that doesn't reflect any of the more abstract and simplified concepts in the article, and isn't accompanied by something that explains that this is a complete system with purpose that incorporates much more than just the minimal principles explained in the article. Also, the black and white, while aesthetically pleasing, probably makes it harder for people who've not seen the electronic components in person to understand what they're looking at.

In that sense, I'd recommend removal of that picture.

Inventor and year

edit

Who invented the Buck converter and when?

What is the oldest published circuit schematic of the Buck converter?

This article on the Forward converter claims the Buck and the Boost converters date to the early 1920s: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.362.6824&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

ICE77 (talk) 08:32, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Poorly selected intro image

edit

The image in the introduction of the "Buck converter" article shows a buck, boost, buck-boost, and Ćuk converter, but the only identifying text in the image is cut-off, leaving them individually unlabeled. We *should not* assume that the caption below the image is enough to make their identities clear, _especially_ since that caption may be altered without the image being altered to match. Preferably a further cut-down version which _only_ shows the buck converter should be used (because it is distinctly odd to be showing converters _other_ than a buck converter in the *introduction* to the buck converter article, as those should be left to further sections of the article where they can be contrasted with the buck converter, something which shouldn't be done in the introduction), or the original version of the image (which I have seen before, and which had all four types labeled) should be used instead. 2602:301:7764:AC00:201B:C2B5:B0DE:D4B (talk) 20:49, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

I have reverted the image on Wikimedia Commons, but it takes a while to percolate back up to the main page and through all the mirror sites. Constant314 (talk) 22:30, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply