Prari

Welcome!

Hello, Prari, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Rror (talk) 12:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Try to provide an edit summary with each of your edits, preferably with a clear reason for the change. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

• But 100% of my article edits have edit summaries. Prari (talk) 21:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Right, but note the reason part above. An edit summary of "Undid revision by ..." does not tell why. Vandalism and many unhelpful edits are obvious and do not need a reason however. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 06:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

surely it should be "Medium-speed vehicle"

Hi, I see you moved Medium Speed Vehicles to Medium Speed Vehicle. But it should be Medium-speed vehicle for the following reasons:

• consistency with the existing Low-speed vehicle article
• Avoiding Unnecessary Capitalization
• it's good English grammar to hyphenate three-word phrases such as "medium-speed vehicle" (and "three-word phrases" :-) )
• The government page on medium-speed vehicles writes the phrase that way.

Do you have any objection to me making this move?

Cheers, -- Skierpage (talk) 00:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Good idea, I support the move. Reasons are similar to the previous move of Low Speed Vehicle to Low-speed vehicle by the way. The Mike McQuary article has the Low Speed and Medium Speed links and I matched that sloppy style, not thinking.

Prari (talk) 07:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

electrification

Third rail systems cannot use low-level platform. 121.102.47.215 (talk) 13:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Preferred Number and Inductor

Hi, Thank you for taking the time to review edits. I see that you removed my link to E-Series. I don't believe this to be spam. I think it helps back up what is stated in the article about E-Series and is presented in a very useful tabular format. Lindseyrose (talk) 09:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Granted, Vishay does some good technical writing to support its marketing efforts, as do its competitors. I assure you that even after I unlink those documents from Wikipedia, the engineers I know can easily obtain them by a quick phone call to a distributor, by internet search, or by attending an industry conference.

Sometimes commercial documents are cited about what that company invented or uniquely produces, and sometimes external links are allowed temporarily to supplement an article not yet complete. But Preferred_number#E_series:_Capacitors_and_resistors is already comprehensive with very useful tables and clear illustrations. It's adequately sourced to international standard IEC 60063 which is of course verifiable, unbiased and reliable. And I possess E-Series resistors older than upstart manufacturer Vishay, so I judge they don't deserve an honorable mention. Prari (talk) 03:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Based on your comments, I believe you agree that engineers might wish to acquire the e-series information to assist them. It would appear to make sense to provide this information or a link it, in the area of Wikipedia which deals with the components to which they apply. Rather than forcing a call to a Distributor, or another internet search as you noted. That was the reason we supplied the original content and I think you will agree that if contacting a supplier or making another search were the alternative, there would be no need for any content on Wikipedia. I understand the need to control content on Wikipedia, however I disagree with you referring to Vishay as an “upstart manufacturer”. I consider Vishay an important supplier in the resistor market who have numerous patents. Although you may not recognize the name Vishay they have acquired a number of established resistor companies including Dale, Draloric, Sfernice, Electro-Films, BCcomponents (formerly Philips), Corning, Angstrohm and Beyschlag. As a result Vishay have a manufacturing history dating back to the early fifties and are number 1 worldwide for wirewound and other power resistors, leaded film resistors and thin-film SMD resistors.--Lindseyrose (talk) 13:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any feedback to my response dated 19th May? --Lindseyrose (talk) 13:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

makeitfrom dot com

Hi, what's your reasoning for believing this is not a RS? Seems pretty legit to me. Wizard191 (talk) 12:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I have contempt for that web source for the following reasons:

• According to their own footnote on each page, "No guarantee is given for the accuracy of website content." They deny being a reliable source!

• Anonymous. No person, organization, or firm is staking their reputation. They present no credentials, have no track record to evaluate.

• Vague attribution of multiple sources for groups of facts, as if they are competent to perform original research and synthesize the data. How do we verify?

• Content is distributed in small chunks across many advertising-laden pages. That design is typical of scraper sites; they exist to make money from advertising impressions counting each page hit. No doubt the original sources are easier to read through and print.

• It's a "beta" (new) website being cited and linked rapidly (and exclusively) by a new editor; neither has earned trust and the pattern suggests promotion by someone with a conflict of interest.

Prari (talk) 08:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Those are some pretty good reason. Thanks for the explanation. Wizard191 (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

EGR Deletion

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to [[:EGR deletion]], you may be blocked from editing. --Dana60Cummins (talk) 18:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

There is no reason to discard such elementary facts on diesel EGR. --Dana60Cummins (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The sun rises in the east, and tuners bullshit about engine mods. How lame is the mechanic who merely removes parts (emission controls, mufflers, bumpers, etc.) which a daily-driver should have? Fact is, EGR continues to be designed into many engines by experts; EGR deletion is a fringe topic.
Prari (talk) 04:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

What about EGR Deletion in diesel engines makes it a fringe theory? The diesel EGR deletion and gas EGR deletion are two totally different issues. Polar opposites in fact. --Dana60Cummins (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Your edits to Oscilloscope

Re. this diff: as one of the writers of the "related instruments" stuff I think you did a great job on this. Thank you for rewriting to improve rather than simply deleting! Jeh (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Future break-of-gauge points

Future (not current) break-of-gauge points:

• Direct connection between 1676 Indian gauge and 1520 Russian gauge
  • Bering crossing (Russia - North America)
    • Bering Strait rail tunnel: 1520 Russian gauge
    • Alaska, Canada and the continental United States: should convert to 1676 Indian gauge
  • Afghanistan (Russia - India)
    • Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan: 1520 Russian gauge
    • Afghanistan: should choose 1676 Indian gauge
• 1676 and 1435
  • Iran/Afghanistan border
    • Iran: 1435
    • Afghanistan: should choose 1676
  • US/Mexico border
    • United States: should convert to 1676
    • Mexico: 1435
  • India/Myanmar (Burma) border
    • India: 1676
    • Myanmar (Burma): should choose 1435

220.210.143.190 (talk) 05:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

direct connection between 1520mm and 1676mm

• Rail networks in Alaska, Canada and the continental United States should be converted to 1676 Indian gauge including double track electrification 25kV alternating current and enlarging loading gauge and further extension of the networks.

220.210.143.190 (talk) 05:36, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Rail freight flows between USA and Mexico. Why create a break-of-gauge at that border? Prari (talk) 04:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Because illegal Hispanic immigrations. US and Canada should be converted to 1676 Indian gauge before they have their high-speed trains, while Mexico should retain 1435 standard gauge. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 09:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

US and Canada should convert from 4 ft 8+1⁄2 in (1,435 mm) standard gauge to 5 ft 6 in (1,676 mm) Indian gauge and 25kV AC electrification before they have their high-speed trains. Mexico should retain 1,435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in) standard gauge. FERISTSA will choose 1,435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in) standard gauge.

I'll send emails of US, Canada, Spain and Portugal to UIC within this year. I support Isambard Kingdom Brunel, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Barack Hussein Obama. Please support Barack Hussein Obama!! 220.210.143.190 (talk) 09:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Brunel is my kind of hero! Prari (talk) 07:28, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Improving the Rambler and AMC engine articles

	Keep on Rambling!
	Thank you for clearing up the text in these articles! CZmarlin (talk) 00:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Prari, you edited the Cremophor page. It appears to me that the structure of Cremophor and the structure of PGPR are the same. I have the documentation. I don't have the time to edit this myself. Would you want to look at what I've got? Additions could be made to both pages.Tmitche (talk) 19:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)