Content deleted Content added
Wtshymanski (talk | contribs) Ambles off, humming Every Sperm is Sacred |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
NO single part number of a transistor or diode is notable in the Wikipedia sense. It's a parts list entry, not an article. This --thing-- tells us nothing we wouldn't learn from a parts catalog. All these transistor articles should be merged to "Semiconductor history" or "Development of the silicon transistor" as illustarative devices, not as free-standing topics by themselves. --[[User:Wtshymanski|Wtshymanski]] ([[User talk:Wtshymanski|talk]]) 13:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
NO single part number of a transistor or diode is notable in the Wikipedia sense. It's a parts list entry, not an article. This --thing-- tells us nothing we wouldn't learn from a parts catalog. All these transistor articles should be merged to "Semiconductor history" or "Development of the silicon transistor" as illustarative devices, not as free-standing topics by themselves. --[[User:Wtshymanski|Wtshymanski]] ([[User talk:Wtshymanski|talk]]) 13:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
:You already lost that argument. Why not try being constructive for a while instead? [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 16:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
:You already lost that argument. Why not try being constructive for a while instead? [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 16:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
::I'm trying [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2N3906&diff=prev&oldid=422252927] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2N3906&diff=prev&oldid=422252927] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2N3906&diff=prev&oldid=422252481]. And for other parts, for example, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2N2907&diff=prev&oldid=422251907] gives us an actual date, with reference and a citation and everything, though it's for a second source of the part and still doesn't tell us anything about the origins. I've even been mentioned as contributing by another editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wtshymanski&diff=422194790&oldid=422037283]. But [[Doris Grau}there's very little meat in these gym mats]]. All those wonderful sources out there and yet nothing tells us, oh, say, how many were made, or why anyone should care about this obscure trinket. If you're sitting on "The 2N3906 Story: The Epic Brawling Saga of a Silicon Switching Transistor, the Men who Made It, The Women who Loved Them! (soon to be a major motion picture)", please quote away. I look forward to the Article Rescue Squadron fixing the numerous errors in these "articles", starting with comparing them to a JEDEC registered data sheet and fixing the oh-so-important specifications. --[[User:Wtshymanski|Wtshymanski]] ([[User talk:Wtshymanski|talk]]) 16:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:57, 5 April 2011
Electronics Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Notability
NO single part number of a transistor or diode is notable in the Wikipedia sense. It's a parts list entry, not an article. This --thing-- tells us nothing we wouldn't learn from a parts catalog. All these transistor articles should be merged to "Semiconductor history" or "Development of the silicon transistor" as illustarative devices, not as free-standing topics by themselves. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- You already lost that argument. Why not try being constructive for a while instead? Dicklyon (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'm trying [1] [2] [3]. And for other parts, for example, [4] gives us an actual date, with reference and a citation and everything, though it's for a second source of the part and still doesn't tell us anything about the origins. I've even been mentioned as contributing by another editor [5]. But [[Doris Grau}there's very little meat in these gym mats]]. All those wonderful sources out there and yet nothing tells us, oh, say, how many were made, or why anyone should care about this obscure trinket. If you're sitting on "The 2N3906 Story: The Epic Brawling Saga of a Silicon Switching Transistor, the Men who Made It, The Women who Loved Them! (soon to be a major motion picture)", please quote away. I look forward to the Article Rescue Squadron fixing the numerous errors in these "articles", starting with comparing them to a JEDEC registered data sheet and fixing the oh-so-important specifications. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)