Welcome!
edit
|
Discussion with me (ex: about my edits)
edit
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Centripetal force, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Sorry for that. I undid some of your edits (eg; [1]), partly because we usually put inline math variables in italics and standalone math in <math></math>, and partly because of content problems. The note that you added there was not ok. I undid for the reason give here. Also note that we don't note in articles 
— see wp:NOTED. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- DVdm, thanks for the comment. I understand where you're coming from. I should not have used the word "note". Perhaps solving for acceleration is not necessary, but stating the acceleration equation is. It adds clarity and understanding to the reader. You saying that my statement here is wrong: "causes the mass term to cancel out in the right-most term" is wrong)" is also wrong. Solving for acceleration removes mass from the equation. I'm not sure how you could not call that "cancelling out."
- Lastly, undoing my centripetal force changes is one thing, but completely undoing 6 hrs of work on the thermal resistance page is just ridiculous. That page's example is very very poorly written as it stands, and my edits were a significant improvement. I am convinced you must not have read the previous content nor my content or else you would have seen the significant improvement of my content over the previous content. All I can think is you found fault with my citations or style or something and didn't feel like helping me to improve what I had done. Undoing my entire work there is a major setback in the quality of that article, and I would like to see my changes re-instated. ERCaGuy (talk) 17:47, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please indent your talk page messages as outlined in wp:THREAD and wp:INDENT — See Help:Using talk pages. Hoping you don't mind, I have slightly reformatted your reply along these guidelines. Thanks.
- I have replied on the article talk page Talk:Thermal resistance: [2]. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 18:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for teaching me about the indent thing. It makes sense. I've never used a "talk page" until today. I didn't even know they existed. Now I know. I also see Wikipedia as a very valuable resource, and I've just started making major contributions. My thermal resistance and thermal conductivity pages were my first major edits, because I saw them needing major improvement. Wikipedia is far far from complete, and as an embedded software/firmware/EE engineer, I'd like to help improve it. That's my goal. Please don't discourage me or others by looking at the superficial problems, formatting, or editing, instead of the core content. I've never known how to make equations in Wikipedia until 2 days ago either, and this stuff can't be learned all at once. You veterans must have patience with us as we figure out the details. If I strive for perfection all at once, nothing gets done. Therefore, it is essential that new, serious contributors like me be given some leeway on the details as we provide good content. Rather than perfection, I strive for correct content the first go-around and then try to fix the format and style as I learn it, and with help from people like you. ERCaGuy (talk) 18:25, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- My apologies, I misjudged you. - DVdm (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. I've updated my user page to give people a better idea of who I am and what I am trying to accomplish. ERCaGuy (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- If you are willing, DVdm, I'd like you hear your opinion (after carefully reading my responses and arguments of course), on the Thermal Resistance talk page, since you undoing my big edit is what spurred this whole debate in the first place. I don't want to waste my life trying to convince others to let me contribute, so what comes out of this will shape how I view and use Wikipedia potentially for the rest of my life. As we all do, I have limited time and energy and am trying to determine where I should focus my efforts to help others: Wikipedia (ex: my version of the thermal resistance pg here), Wikiversity, Instructables.com, my own website, or somewhere else. Presently though I've found the Wikipedia route to be very discouraging and not a very good use of my time, even though I originally thought it the best place since I'm definitely NOT writing a text book, NOT writing instructions or tutorials, and placing the basic examples where they are best supported: with the core content on the encyclopedia page itself. I think I've made an edit or two in the past (not recently) where a Wikiversity page would have been better, but I don't think the level of detail of my example here fits that venue the best, and I'm also worried people like you will come along and delete sources to Wikiversity pages I may work on in the future too (ie: a link on a Wikipedia page to a Wikiversity page). If that's the case, I don't think contributing on Wikiversity is the right answer either. ERCaGuy (talk) 19:16, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hm... looking at the responses (—yours rather long, others' rather terse—) at Talk:Thermal resistance, if indeed you found the Wikipedia route to be very discouraging, I can only advise to take it one small step at the time. There is so much to learn here. Frankly, I have no idea what Wikiversity is about. I just had a look at it. I started the newcomers' tour. And stopped already before having even read the first (simple) slide. Blame it on overload, sigh. If you are new to Wikipedia, I can imagine how hard it must be. So again, try to find some common ground on Talk:Thermal resistance. Good luck... - DVdm (talk) 21:30, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- My apologies, I misjudged you. - DVdm (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for teaching me about the indent thing. It makes sense. I've never used a "talk page" until today. I didn't even know they existed. Now I know. I also see Wikipedia as a very valuable resource, and I've just started making major contributions. My thermal resistance and thermal conductivity pages were my first major edits, because I saw them needing major improvement. Wikipedia is far far from complete, and as an embedded software/firmware/EE engineer, I'd like to help improve it. That's my goal. Please don't discourage me or others by looking at the superficial problems, formatting, or editing, instead of the core content. I've never known how to make equations in Wikipedia until 2 days ago either, and this stuff can't be learned all at once. You veterans must have patience with us as we figure out the details. If I strive for perfection all at once, nothing gets done. Therefore, it is essential that new, serious contributors like me be given some leeway on the details as we provide good content. Rather than perfection, I strive for correct content the first go-around and then try to fix the format and style as I learn it, and with help from people like you. ERCaGuy (talk) 18:25, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Sources
edit Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Thermal conductivity, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. See also my comment on the article talk page. - DVdm (talk) 17:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)