Mange01

Welcome!

Hello, Mange01, 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
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --StuffOfInterest 12:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Category:Articles with example pidgincode

Hello, and also a warm welcome from me. I saw that you created Category:Articles with example pidgincode. Could you please explain me why you did this? I can't see at the moment why it would be useful to categorize all articles with pidgin code together. Thanks in advance for your reply. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I nominated it for deletion, at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 October_17#Category:Articles with example pidgincode. Wonder if you could comment there. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanx for the warm welcome. I created the category becuase I need it, and beleive others also do. When I have written academic publications with pidgin code (mathematical style pseudo code), I have often looked for good examples on formatting. Pidgin code is much more compact and less informal than conventional pseudo code, and is ideal for describing algorithms. There are 16 other sub categories of Category:Articles_with_example_code, including Category:Articles with example pseudocode, so why not this one?

Do you suggest that the name should be changed to Articles with mathematical style pseudo code? Mange01 11:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

If you have the time, you could go back and re-tag those articles with the "Articles with example code" category. It'd at least give you (and others) a central place to find them. Thanks, Lunch 20:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern. I have solved it by linking to those articles from the pseudo code article. Kindly, Mange01 15:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Renaming pages and fixing redirects

If you rename a page, please find all the pages that point to the newly-created redirect page for the old name (go to the old name, which will take you to the new name; click on the old name in the "Redirected from" item at the top of the page, which takes you to the redirect page; click on "What links here" in the "toolbox" section on the left margin, which takes you to a page showing all the pages that link to the redirect page), and then fix all the links that are from "redirect pages" to redirect to the new name. Wikipedia doesn't do more than one level of redirection, so if, for example, you go to CIFS, it doesn't take you to the Server message block page, it takes you to the "Server Message Block" redirect page.

BTW, the Wikipedia conventions on capitalization in titles say "Do not capitalize second and subsequent words unless the title is a proper noun (such as a name) or is otherwise almost always capitalized" (emphasis mine), so "Server Message Block" would be considered OK as a title if it's usually referred to, when spelled out, as "Server Message Block" (see, for example, the Transmission Control Protocol page). Guy Harris 21:44, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

TCP/IP model vs. DoD model

Then perhaps the DoD model page should be renamed to TCP/IP model, as that page should discuss the model rather than the protocol suite. A direct rename isn't possible, as there's already a TCP/IP model page; I'll request that the move be done by an administrator. (And, no, I'm not happy about of much of what the DoD's done since its formation, either.) Guy Harris 08:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

:)

Good idea. "TCP/IP reference model" could be an alternative name, or it should at least be redirected to the TCP/IP model page.

I added the template:IPstack template to the DoD model page. The template should be modified to include the five layers. And the text should emphasize the five layer model over the old four layer one. Mange01 09:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it's too late to stop the momentum, but there is no IETF document that specifies a "reference model." Reference model is essentially an OSI concept that was never used in the IETF philosophy, articulated by Dave Clark, of "We don't believe in kings, presidents, or voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code."

Too many years of my life was spent working with ISO/ITU formalism and lack of results. I have spent enough years as an IETF participant to accept that a protocol reference model is of use only as an introductory learning aid, certainly not a constraint on protocol architecture. Ironically, those who insist on the value of the OSI Reference Model seem to assume that it was frozen in the main ISO 7498 document, not even in the annexes to it, and certainly not the later refinements such as the Internal Organization of the Network Layer, OSI Routeing Framework, and other documents that actually made it realistic. Howard C. Berkowitz 00:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Category: Physical layer protocols

I have reverted one of your additions (in ISDN) of the Physical layer protocol category tag, before I noticed that you have made this change in a number of other articles. Instead of reverting those as well I thought I'd come and talk to you first. I explained my ISDN revert in the comments. You have also tagged Modem as a physical layer protocol. I'm perhaps a nitpicker, but modems aren't protocols, but rather they implement protocols. Secondly, whereas their primary function is to modulate and demodulate (which are indeed layer-1 functions), the vast majority of modems implement higher-layer protocols as well (e.g. layer-2 functions such as framing, flow control, error detection and error correction). I'd be interested in your thoughts. JanCeuleers 13:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou for a good comment! I have answered it in Category_talk:Physical_layer_protocols. Mange01 20:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Good job

Hi good work with categories in computer neworks, wireless communication .. :) --- ALM 22:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou ALM for your encouragement! I notice in your contribution list that you are perhaps even more active as wiki editor than I am! Mange01 23:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Do not know about this for sure. However, over this weekend, I want to create articles on S-MAC and MACAW, Wireless sensor network and Ad-hoc network MAC protocols. I hope that you would have time to review them when I will be done with them. It is because my English is not good. Should I leave a message after creating them? In real life my supervisor re-write most of my papers :). Thank you. --- ALM 00:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added them to my watch list. Looking forward to read them. However, I don't speak native English, so don't trust me too much. Mange01 00:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Most of my Swedish friends had better English than me. I had worked six months in Lund University and like Swedish people in general (have good memories). --- ALM 00:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice to hear! Actually I am responsible for master of science programmes in computer engineering at Mid Sweden University. We have had a quite large group of students from Pakistan the last two years, and I have good experience from working with them. Several of them are better than me on English, and all of them are very polite.

I would like to invite you to be a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Telecommunications Mange01 01:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Thanx for welcoming me to WikiProject_Telecommunications, but I will not be a major contributor. I am a computer programmer (I wrote 1% of the Cobol 2002 standard). I run the wires and such, but I am no expert in telecommunications. I am working on Disambiguation_pages_with_links and handled the word "propagation". All I did was fix links; I am not doing content.

If you are doing content, let me tell you what you need: Sumbuddy in the telecommunications project should write an article called Signal propagation, and many of the links I just pointed at wave propagation and radio propagation should be redirected thereto. Also, you need to take on the regular task of keeping propagation links clean. -- Randall Bart 00:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanx for the suggestion. I dont understand the difference between signal and wave propagation. Why not merge radio/wave propagation into one article, and call it signal propagation? Mange01 01:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to the WP:TEL page

Sorry I didn't respond earlier, I must have missed your message, I jujst noticed it. Thanks for your help, they really helped the page a lot. You are welcome to beomce a member, if you choose to, and have not already. aido2002 05:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Computer networking

		The Technology Barnstar
		This barnstar is in recognition of your reorganization and cleanup of the whole computer networking tree. It is a project I had started, went off on a wikibreak and upon return found you had taken it to the next level. Thanks for your diligence and insight! JonHarder talk 01:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I am flattered. Mange01 12:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the invite to WP:TEL! :-) --HappyCamper 16:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for the fix in 4G. I spend more time re-writing than re-searching and I'm glad someone keeps my edits honest :) Cheers. DasBub 21:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

And thnx for spending time correcting my spelling mistake... :)

Equalizer mention in the Fading article

Hi! I notice you re-inserted the equalizer mention into the list of techniques for improving robustness to fading. I added a comment to the Talk page there regarding my motivation for the initial removal and would appreciate if you could weigh in with your thoughts. Thanks! Elch Yenn 14:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi ...

I wish to join wikiproject telecommunication. Please tell me how to go about it, and anything else I need to know. Thanks. -- Amit 01:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You are most welcome! You are only a couple of clicks from joining... Click at WP:TEL. Scroll down to "full time..." or "part time participans" and click at the "Edit" link besides that header. Add the following line below the list of participants: * ~~~~. You may also add the {{WikiProject:Tel}} template to your own user page.

Digital Audio broadcast

Hi, i see that you have voiced some concerns over the digital audio broadcast article. I have posted a request for comments about the bias of the article, and hope that you can spare a few minutes and share your comments. best regards, Ga-david.b 18:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Articles with example pseudocode

Hello. This is a courtesy note that I nominated Category:Articles with example pseudocode for deletion. You can comment at the CfD debate. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 14:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thnx for notifying me. Mange01 (talk)

Redirect of Talk:DVB-H and DVB-SH

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Talk:DVB-H and DVB-SH, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Talk:DVB-H and DVB-SH is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Talk:DVB-H and DVB-SH, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

baseband vs passband

I reverted your changes about baseband versus passband in Shannon–Hartley theorem. Please take another look, and explain on the article talk page if you still think there's a difference in this context. Dicklyon (talk) 15:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thnx for informing me, and for watching over the quality of this article. Mange01 (talk) 22:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:COMPUTING Invitation

I have noticed that you are already a member of a related project and thought you might be interested in this wikiproject also and hence leaving this note ... - From the outreach dept

Please accept this invite to join the Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. Simply click here to accept! -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 06:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Intergrated banner for WikiProject Computer networking

I have made a proposal for a intergrated banner for the project here . I invite you for your valuable comments in the discussion. You are receiving this note as you are a member of the project. Thanks -- Tinu Cherian - 11:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikimania 2010 could be coming to Stockholm!

I'm leaving you a note as you may be interested in this opportunity.

People from all six Nordic Wiki-communities (sv, no, nn, fi, da and is) are coordinating a bid for Wikimania 2010 in Stockholm. I'm sending you a message to let you know that this is occurring, and over the next few months we're looking for community support to make sure this happens! See the bid page on meta and if you like such an idea, please sign the "supporters" list at the bottom. Tack (or takk), and have a wonderful day! Mike H. Fierce! 09:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you help me find this source of this information77.30.71.27 (talk) 19:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)AA

I saw that you are a full-time member in WikiProject Telecommunications and I have a question about information that I found in that project but I did not find its citation. I do not know if you can help me find the source of this information it would be greate help to me.

the information that I am looking to its source is the colomn named Typ throughput (Mbit/s) in the table shown in this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Wireless_Networking_Standards

Regards 77.30.71.27 (talk) 19:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)AA

Hello. Actually I was the one that added the template "citation needed" in that column a while ago. Please contribute with some reference to that article. The throughput figures might have to be adjusted. If you search in Google scholar or google books for 802.11 "typical throughput" you might find some good references. After a quick search, I found this source. But I don't agree with the usage of the term "raw data rate" in that book. To my understanding, they mean the physical layer net bit rate. The raw bit rate inclusive of error-correction codes and synchronization overhead is even higher. The reason that the typical throughput is lower than the maximum net bit rate is to my understanding link adaptation (automatic change of modulation scheme and error-correcting code), ARQ data packet retransmissions, MAC layer CSMA/CA waiting time and other link layer protocol overhead. But maybe I'm wrong. Please check this, and feel free to clarify it in the article. Mange01 (talk) 19:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help.

I have found other sources but still there is no formal source that uses the same numbers used in wikipedia. is there a way to know how has added this information so that we can ask him about the source of this information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.31.80.43 (talk) 21:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The average throughput can not be hard facts, since it depends on measurement method, environment, type of data traffic, distance, interference situation, antenna type, manufacturer, etc. Even in a computer simulation, there are many possible traffic models and wave propagation models that people use, and that gives different results. I would not trust Wikipedia on this issue, since no source is given. Once again, don't hesitate to replace these numbers by figures that you have found in a book or a peer-reviwed paper, or a standard, and state the source.

I searched through the history. The numbers have been adjusted several times, but almost the same numbers were published in the [IEEE 802.11 version 5th may 2007 by user:75.68.113.133. Other number were published in the [IEEE 802.11 version 28 maj 2006] by user:203.173.155.197. Mange01 (talk) 13:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

MedCab

Hi. A MedCab case has been opened here, regarding Anthony Flew. You have been named as a participant. Please visit the case page and indicate whether or not you will participate. Thank you. [roux » x] 23:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Get in touch with

The person responsible for this course - I think it would be a good idea. What do you think? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thnks - definitely interesting! I found the syllabus of this high school course, and added it to the wikiversity:wikipedia#Other courses. Mange01 (talk) 00:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Quiz

I'm trying to understand what the purpose is of Multiple-choice test about criticism of Wikipedia. Can you explain? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Impressive, I haven't seen that wiki functionality yet. Can this be used for real classroom quizzes, with secure grading? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 07:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Will: These are self-test questions or review questions, that aims at checking that you have understood the Wikipedia article where you found the link. They are part of the Wikiversity course on Wikis and Wikipedia. I have now tried to explain that in the text. Please fact-check them. If people help me improving them, I will develop more questions.

Piotrus: In the "real" university course that we are developing, similar questions will be given as assessments, on the course Moodle server. But i start developing them on the Wikiversity site, because I need help with checking the formulations, the correct answers, etc.

Both of you: Why not add your names to the List of interested course developers? Mange01 (talk) 08:36, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:TEL template

Hi thanks for sorting out my user page with WP:TEL template. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually the problem somehow must have been caused by my change to the template. Mange01 (talk) 22:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Cognitive Radios

I have proposed the merger of the Cognitive Radios article into the Cognitive radio article. Please offer your comment on the talk page.Kgrr (talk) 15:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Channel access methods template

Thanks, I noticed you've been a busy bee clearing up multiple access versus multiplexing confusion.Mojodaddy (talk) 03:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Link protocols

• Category:Link protocols → category:Data Link Layer protocols —(Discuss)— All TCP/IP reference models Link protocols are not included (physical layer protocols are excluded), but the category is a good reflection of the OSI model Data Link Layer protocols. --Mange01 (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Moved here because WP:RM can not be used for categories. See WP:CfD. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Mind uploading

Hi -- just to explain, I don't mind at all seeing an article on mind uploading / whole brain emulation, but it's basically a science fiction concept for the foreseeable future, so I'm going to resist adding "See Also"s to it from solid science-based articles like computational neuroscience. Looie496 (talk) 21:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure. But we would like your help on improving the article, especially the section on current research. Mange01 (talk) 22:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy tags

Hi, I removed the tag you left on IMINT Image Intelligence AB since it was requesting a speedy deletion but supplied no rationale. Speedy is generally considered to be for articles which have no hope (copyvios, vandalism, totally non notable subjects etc) so it's usually a good idea to provide a rationale- a particualr criterion is best, such as G11, G3 or A7- but youc an type one ut if you like. If you find an article that doesn't fit one of the criteria at WP:CSD, then it's best to do it the long way via either WP:PROD (for uncontroversial deletetions) or WP:AfD (where you're not sure, your PROD was declined or deletion may be controversial). Any questions, just yell. HJMitchell You rang? 10:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

MB → MiB, etc.

Current Wikipedia policy is not to use the metric binary prefixes except in unusual circumstances. See WP:COMPUNITS. There was a large amount of unpleasant debate on this subject. I'm not sure I agree with the end result, but it is policy and not simple ignorance of the prefixes as your recent edits imply. -- BenRG (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

This was interesting news. I obey - although I do not agree with the policy. I have reverted my changes. There should be a template indicating what definition of kB, MB and GB that is used in the article. Mange01 (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Note that the MoS allows the use of KiB/MiB/GiB/etc... if most of the sources on the topic also use KiB/MiB/GiB. If not, you can always write the full number of bytes (such A video card of 64 MB (64 × 2²⁰ bytes)) if the precise amount is important. As for the template, see {{BDprefix}}. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 05:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

"Region MittSverige"

Hello, regarding your creation here, if you ever want to have a page that you have created deleted, just add {{db-user}} at the top and an admin will delete it shortly, only use that for pages you create though, all the best Spitfire^Tally-ho! 07:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thnx. Mange01 (talk) 08:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

"Moved incorrectly placed quotation mark"

In American English, the period goes within the quotes, not outside. As the article uses American English for a largely American topic quoting an American author, per WP:ENGVAR the quotation mark was not incorrectly placed. DreamGuy (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Quantities of bytes

Template:Quantities of bytes has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Cybercobra (talk) 01:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

About Pseudocode

Hi Mange01, thanks to inform that the illustration in Pseudocode article is a Fortran code. I'm sorry if I add that illustration to the article because I didn't know that Fortran actually use the same style as pseudocode which my University thought to me. Oh yeah, to be precise, what Fortran version that File:Module in Pseudocode.png code belong to? I'm just curious. Ivan Akira (talk) 00:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ivan. I'm no expert, but I beleive it is Fortran90. There is no standard for Pseudo-code but perhaps your school wants you to get used to Fortan style pseudo code. What is missing in your example is natural language code, or some non-ascii mathematical expressions. Without that, it is not pseudocode. Mange01 (talk) 01:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Thanks to inform me then. Ivan Akira (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I have edited the description on the illustration file, have a look. Thanks again. Ivan Akira (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

SINAD, SQNR, and Noise

Hi Mange01. Thanks for your recent edits to the noise page - it's getting better now. I noticed you're added redirects for Signal-to-quantization noise ratio and Signal-to-Noise-And-Distortion to their acronyms. Given that the SNR page is called Signal-to-noise ratio, do you think it would be better to move those pages to their full names? I was about to move Signal to noise plus interference to "Signal-to-noise-plus-interference" (hyphens rather than spaces), but realised "Signal-to-noise plus interference" may be more appropriate. What do you think? GyroMagician (talk) 11:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Great idea. "Signal-to-noise plus interference" sounds good. If you have time, please do it. Mange01 (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Done :-) Could you have a look at the Signal-to-quantization-noise ratio page? I've tried to tidy it up a bit - I don't think I've changed the math, but I'd like a second pair of eyes to check. GyroMagician (talk) 10:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge

Template:Wireless systems should be merged into Template:Mobile telecommunications standards. Such was the conclusion of a discussion at WP:TFD, but none of us involved has the knowledge to actually do so. Since you have of late edited both template, perhaps you you do this, or help me do it? Debresser (talk) 15:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. Currently {{Wireless systems}} is much more clear than {{Tl:Mobile telecommunications standards}}. However, I suggest one column per family, and one row per generation. The columns should be "GSM / UMTS Family", "cdmaOne / CDMA2000 Family" and "Other Technologies". The rows should be the same as in {{Wireless systems}}. I don't have time to do the whole work, but if you come up with a suggestion I can look at it. Mange01 (talk) 17:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for trying to help me. Unfortunately, this is all Chinese to me. Perhaps you'll have more time in the future. Debresser (talk) 19:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for that merge. And for the good-looking result. Debresser (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

??? To MUX (on it's own) or not to MUX-TV into it (by keeping both separate).??

""" re: MERGE (specifically regarding MUX "page"/ / MUX-TV "page" = as they are ? SIMILAR.

Does not befit the premise, that THESE TWO "similar" .. but totally unrelated pages, should ever be "merged". As a merger will technically destroy both - into a summated guess of the resultant ckaoss.

But it does better "lean" towards them being retrospectively interlinked (( related "look at this // as you look at that" ?? differently)) As a type of dual [link]<><[link] that leaves each PAGE separate, but referenced together (under the one umbrella subjective idea - for researeching ONLY, not as a one pagfe fits alll, as there is a third MUX, which is completely different to both of these (regrding ONLY analougue audio).. ie: 2ch stereo (is the down-mux minimum carrier. It is NOT the one needing to be further shrunk into a single digital medium, for transmission on a siongle telephone circuit. However, the analogue method oif de-mux after one has two chs at a place one needs to demux these, it can be "fed" with a digital single data cable, demuxed to two ch stereo digitally, AND THEN analgogue demuxing takes over.

To obtaine the "abbey road studio pre-mixed single laid down tracks, as if one simply plays all 64 tracks (in your VCR as a source 2ch, then amplified into your surround audio sytem in your room as if YOU were the abbey road studio , pl;aying all of these exactly as they did, in the studio.

Thus remain the original MUX & MUX-TV pages = as two pages, co-joined in a semi-loose version of interlinked, (cross-referenced to each other), in a similar "related", but not "exactly the same" subjects METHOD; of ensuring that if one "person" wants to see a ::very similar yet completely different way, of :"looking" at exactly the same "basic" principle of transportation, in which neither method, exactly matches the other)

? See.. those two pages MUST NOT be merged, or the lines of information (related to each individual subject),will forever be destroyed. Thus then a "check this page" = rather than "all in the one page" in an ? These two different pages (in one page now merged? "is exactly the same generalized idea of a concept", just not even remotely similar in a factually correct "contextual concept", ? Simply doesn't do either subject any good.

In fact - over time, could irreparably destroy both, in a manner that "co-joining" the individual pages, of each of them - by reference only, rather than an aggressive means of (MUST DESTROY THE INTEGRITY "of each single item", in favour of a generalized "overview of both", downsizing of the number of single articles, in Wikipedia) approach - does not one scrap of good, for wikipedia, researchers, the subjects themselves, or the integrity of "having" a Wikipedia type, instantly searchable "multiple articles found" approach to what an encyclopedia is all about.

.?

Why. Well - Yes they DO have the same "looking" purposes. (ie: same basic concept, totally different subjects, being considered for merging).

In fact, without actually understanding the "fundamental differences" (not in how they look, appear to work, should probably do what the appear capable of doing, or even who created the basic "concept" = as to why they should ever be in existence = at all); does NOT, in any manner of form (or attempt to "merge" their descriptive pages form), come anywhere close to forcing these into one page, just becaus ethey have the same basic "colour" of generalised information.

NEITHER is exactly the same as the other.

PLEASD DO NOT MERGE THEM. As? I actually know (well think I know after over 50 years of experimentation, research and commercial development, and many SOLD (never to return faulty) items, which "perform' exactly the same way, each and every time a "specific test signal source, is applied, the individual "strands"(speakers or light-bulbs) that are "generally positioned - oh about there, will produce a harmonic result, WHERRE NO SPEAKER EXISTS, but "only" if all speakers are connected ? in one particular way. Change the position of a single speaker, and the "floating point, MOVES - to take up a position at random -- precisely between that moved speaker AND EVERY OTHE RSPEAKER IN THE ROOM.. Ie: if a cow moves anywhere in a herd of cattle, then "she and her calf" bawl out in unison.. Someone will hear that at a floating "fixed pinpoint" (no speaker anywhere close to say - it came OUT of that ONE., wherever the "summation" of those two is heard. But if "thre" or four or mrore, SPEAKERS - need to "sound" at various loudness (to create a certain cacaphony - at a pinpoint. Then shifting one "moves" the pinpoint anywhere in the sphere as iff invisibly "tensioned equalliy" by all other speakers, yet wil at the new position, always "sound' as if coming from there, regerdless where the one speaker has been shifted, or how fefar (it "sounds" at presoicely the right distnce from all speakers that originally created it, just at a new datum point.

Sorry. I am not sleeping well mowdays, my eyesight is stuft, and I need to watch my fingers more intensely as I remember what I need to type, And dislecksei doesn't help.

JUST PLEASE DO NOT LET THEM MERGE .. MUX & MUX-TV These two pages are the same but NOT equal, similar ut not exactly the same, work differently and for a different purpose -they 'ony" use the same method e;ectron flow.(Period) 115.188.60.103 (talk) 01:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

are positioned, as if around a circular feild, or along the inside skin area, of a 360* spherical (ball) container. EACH AND EVERY TIME, thsis "terminal activates exactly at the same precise instant, that a particular sound is "played" or has ben played, at say, just above the tamborine section's 3rd in from the end Player", beside the loudess drummer of five drums, or two FEET up in the air, above the Bass violinist - () of a third, deeper well hidden meaning, of both, which - when "related" to a totally different material, actually works, in a strangely entanged "instantaineously de-mux'ed way, that even I don't understand how, why where or even "electron movement wise = comes close to explaining this weird thing.

Yet. All I know is this. It works. Exactly the same, irrespective of how "many times" a single signal electron, is "split away, and sent off at a tangent, in a totally different direction (with it's thread of similarly instantaineously transmitted electron pulses frequncy waveforms, loudness, signal strenghts.. all fully intact, at all remote locations.. When (as Einstein so apltly put it, ALL, if "measured at one distant pinpoint location, ALL instantly stp. And all = instantly "display" (not just a 2D mirror image at precisely 180* degrees opposed, (where 2 portions times the angle at measurement = a single 3260* sinosidual waveform pattern as if "sliced" at precisely that instant in time, one half going UP east, the other going DOWN West.?.. but... if there are more than two elements.. Each (to the trillionth portion) will each take an exact = "phase angle of sinusoidal rotation" specifically instantaneously "stopping" as if a disc was "sliced and removed from a multiple cored hemp rope" (of electrons travelling along in space at the same frequncy, the same actual compass direction and at the same potential difference in peak waveform values, NOT ONE OF THE STRANDS, however placed, will ever be on the surface, or anywhere right to the very core , and anywhere along the "rope" just as if it were (but isn't) exactly the same as a single solid rod.

Acting as if a single straight beam of "energy".

Each rotates about it's three main strands, that then rotates around another two strands, to form a string, then several hundred strings, are entangled together to form a , itself entangled with other similarly entangled "cores" that form each strand of the main rope)

Hi. Unfortunately, as I have found in the past several years, my extremely poor results in a long ago (didn't like the teacher, the school, the subject, didn't pass the exam "results") of my dismal failure, in the NZ High School Finals Examination of a 1968 low 34% English S/C. (English being my native/born & thus "only" written spoken or able to be understood "language"), has left me very difficult to understand by most people (some don't even try & seriously loose the plot, the next time I enter text.

SO? I am asking a pretty good editor, to just "say for me, what I am often abused at, for trying to say myself.

Please don't let them "merge" a topic I have been I saw the results, by accident, made trhem by accident, used them becuase it works (everty time) well it did until floating earth return (cannot short any speaker output terminal to any other regardless of polarity or channel type of DIGITAL DUAL AMPS. which are really cheap and nasty (but where cheap = high power) new bridged mode internally bridged on EACH ch output, where two or more "outputs" MUST NEVER EVER HAVE ANY CONNECTION TO EARTH, OR TO AMNY OTHER SPEAKER TERMINAL WIRE(or a catastrophic quite spectaculr instant desruction of one or more outputs will destroy itself.

So? Now I am researching toroid transformrers - to isolate incoming supplies (suplied by outgoing "cannot be interconneted" floating earth return" amps, so that I can convert the isolated floating returns, into a grounged common earth rteturm So that intercnnecting output channels (even when hotswapping terminals) will not effect the floating outputs.

By totally using isolating transformers in audio output, externally to what the manufacturer stipulates in the vales.? I am slowly figuring out a way, to bypass some methods, and introduce others, to creatre a single product (instead of the individually mhand-built custom designed ones - I have been selling since 1965.

To allow me to simply produce a range of different BASIB C power rated units, to seel these to all, instead of maunaully making these in each and every installation if asked by someone who knows prior, how well these work and work every single time (with the same piece the same way, with absolutely no need, to change any values, when another different audio is played, or if different people wan tdiffernt numbers of speakers..One unit created to service everyone's wattage needs. Just has to be better than hand building everything. 01:51, 17 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.60.103 (talk)

New article on QualNet

QualNet is the article I just created and I was hoping you might have some time to review it, or delegate to someone else. you seem very prominent in the computer networking space, so I came to you first. Please let me know how I can improve QualNet. You'll also see I added the wiki link to network simulation, network simulator, and GloMoSim. Any feedback greatly appreciated. LBrown338 (talk) 19:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)LBrown338 Jan 15, 2010

I think you made a good contribution. I suggest that you either describe some technical difference between GloMoSim and QualNet, or that we merge the two articles. Mange01 (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Mange01 for your input. I have added some referencible content about the differences between QualNet and GloMoSim, as well as a few more types of networks that QualNet is used to model. I hope the article is now ready to shed its "brand new article" warning box at the top. If you can make that happen, I would appreciate it; otherwise, let me know what else needs to be done.

LBrown338 (talk) 22:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)LBrown338

Rajive Bagrodia is the next article I created. I was hoping you could check it again for accepability. Thanks for your help with the other article. LBrown338 (talk) 00:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)LBrown338

Oops, wrong line..? ```` (see merge above) ``` ? ~!115.188.60.103 (talk)

DVB-H

I went ahead and reverted your revert. Most of those links are off-topic or redundant, some highly promotional, and one has expired. I think it was proper to remove them per WP:NOTLINK and WP:EL. --Ronz (talk) 17:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

FM Too many animations

Your further participation here would be welcome. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Gaza aid shipment

Lol ... I was about to reverse your changes when I noticed that you had already reversed them. Please join the discussion on the section here Talk:Gaza_flotilla_raid#marvelous and add your thoughts. The reason for the reversal is two-fold 1) there is a current discussion 2) the changes moved the language away from a neutral POV. If you feel these are not valid please say so on the discussion page and help us reach a consensus about the wording :) Zuchinni one (talk) 09:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Gaza aid shipment

Hi Mange01, In light of the changes you made to the naming of the passengers you may want to check out this part of the discussion Talk:Gaza_flotilla_raid/Archive_2#Activists_or_passengers.3F and help to determine what the most non-POV way of describing the passengers would be. In the past it has been suggested that not all the passengers were necessarily pro-Palestinian, or peace activists so blanket statements about who they were seemed non-NPOV Zuchinni one (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Mid Sweden University

Hi, just copy-editing the reference to it at the Signpost's new edition. Surely it's "Mid-Sweden University"? It looks really odd when translated without the hyphen. I am inclined to change it before publication of The Signpost tomorrow. Tony (talk) 13:15, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

In fact a google search shows that some translations do use the hyphen. The MoS requires it. Tony (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the copy-editing. Nice to be mentioned there! I think you can keep the hiphen; i've noticed that native English speaking colleagues sometimes include it, allthough the Mid Sweden University official documents and web site (www.miun.se) exclude it. Let's blame it on the marketers and pr people. Mange01 (talk) 21:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Your edits to Risk (game)

I was wondering where you got your information for the dice statistics you recently added/changed in Risk (game)#Dice probabilities. Can you add a source to those tables? SnottyWong ^gossip 17:38, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I just did a quick brute force simulation of a couple hundred thousand iterations of battles, to test the average number of 1-army territories that can be taken over with x number of attacking armies. My results were significantly different than the results you added to the article (but my code could easily have had inaccuracies). Do you have a source for the information you added to the article (including the 90% confidence values)? If not, those tables might have to be deleted until we can verify they are correct. SnottyWong ^squeal 23:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

THis is interesting. I just answered your question on the article talk page. Mange01 (talk) 23:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

mind transfer

Hi see your mind transfer disc, its been edited tack,

[1]

cyrus111 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.107.63 (talk) 13:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Scientific writing

I probably should have added sources with this edit. I've added two primary sources now.

I also changed your addition slightly. That sentence made it sound as though there is a link between pronoun number or person and grammatical voice. "We" or "I" (or any other subject pronoun) can be used with either active or passive voice. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 21:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Great. Thanks. (I was not the anonymous user that made the original contribution.) Mange01 (talk) 19:11, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Carrier wave Preemphasis improvement Return channel Goodput Phase vocoder Drew McConnell Capture effect Code rate Armstrong phase modulator Maximum usable frequency DataTAC 2N2222 Mobility model Multipath interference LowFER Simplex communication Received signal strength indication Multiplex baseband Rate limiting

Cleanup Wire speed Done Forward error correction Evolved HSPA Merge Duplex (telecommunications) Done PHP Baud Add Sources Dynamic bandwidth allocation Fading Dynamic single-frequency networks Wikify Human ethology John Gardner (Texas Ranger) Soft systems methodology Expand Comparison of mobile phone standards Reactions to the Gaza flotilla raid Hindu genealogy registers at Haridwar

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:08, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Atheism

I have reverted your edit to Atheism since the two sentences you added appear to be a personal unsourced analysis of properly sourced content, and the {{cn}} tag asked for a citation where the cited source directly supports the content. DVdm (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I added three sources now. However, the original source does not treat the subject very objectively. We need more sources any way - for example the primary sources he has studied. Mange01 (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps. Anyway, I have removed one of the unsourced assertions again - see edit summary. We really need a source for that kind of comment. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 12:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thats reasonable. I want to complement you for contacting people like this and explaining why their contritions are reverted. Mange01 (talk) 16:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Revertion of 3G/IMT-2000 edits

(transcribed from Talk:3G#Revertion of article)

I'm not entirely certain why my edits were (almost fully) reverted; but my reasoning for doing them originally was thus:

• It was overcomplicated. For a non-technician, I didn't need to know about TSCDMA and the rarer technology, as I would have never encountered it. When I was attempting to find out which paticular network and systems I used, I was left confused. Common bands, networks, and examples, are also excluded from the article and this limits its relevance to consumers.
  • This is not solely caused by the one article; many other related articles, like UMTS, W-CDMA and Cdma2000 are also confusing. I planned to revise the group of them but never found the time.
• Furthermore, I believed it was inconcise and inconsistently cluttered. I also felt that it was inaccurate in describing its relationship to the IMT2000.
  • I do accept that my limited knowledge caused me to make mistakes in technical accuracy. I did, however feel that the article needed clarification.
• The page attempts to merge the standard for 3G, IMT-2000 with the generation of standards produced from it (IMT-2000).
  • Perhaps I should have created my edits under a new section or into IMT-2000 itself (currently a redirect) as they were not necessarily relevant to introducing 3G networks themselves.

I will wait before proceeding further, for your feedback and your vision/interpretation of the article, but I do intend to edit the page further in future. Please, feel free to discuss on this page, or via my/your talk page. Techhead7890 (talk) 06:41, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah. I've forgotten the Talkspace guidelines, in paticular those regarding fragmented discussion; however I've watchlisted the article's talk as well as yours. Feel free to reply/discuss on whichever one you prefer- I'll follow on from there. Techhead7890 (talk) 07:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I answered on the article talk page. Looking forward for your further improvements of the article! Mange01 (talk) 09:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Goodput

Hi Mange01.

I beg to differ with your definition of goodput, which included: "The amount of data considered excludes protocol overhead bits as well as retransmitted data packets."

In all time-division multiple-access (TDMA) network systems with medium access control (MAC) (e.g., Ethernet (CSMA/CD), PCI (fairness arbiter), 802.11a (CSMA/CA), etc.), physical layer (PHY) frames are separated by inter-message gaps during which time nothing is transferred across the medium as no terminal has acquired medium access control (MAC). The maximum sustained throughput at the MAC sublayer interface with the logical link control (LLC) layer can be greatly affected by the ratio of the (average time of the PHY frames)/(average time of the PHY frames average time of the inter-message gaps). This ratio is often referred to as the medium utilization factor. For example, certain serial data buses can have a maximum utilization factor ranging from 15% to 70%. Thus, the medium utilization factor has a direct and significant affect on the goodput.

The the good faith edit that I provided encompassed the utilization factor affect: "including protocol overhead time and excluding retransmitted data packets time", assuming that the protocol overhead includes the inter-message gaps.

Hopefully, with this information, you will undo your clarification. Indeed, it would be good if you updated the goodput article to include clarifying information similar to that provided above.

Sincerely, DLA (talk) 15:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. Goodput = amount of data/amount of time. My formulation defined what was included in the data, and your in the time. I now made a new edit, as a suggestion on how to explain both. However, I am afraid the article lead is too detailed now. Mange01 (talk) 17:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Another goodput suggestion

Hi again,

I noticed another issue regarding goodput.

The statement that throughput is "(the gross bit rate that is transferred physically)" is not correct.

Thoughput and 'gross bit rate' are similar but different concepts. Wikipedia has a pretty good entry regarding (maximum, peak, sustained) throughput. Indeed, goodput is throughput at the application layer (AL) level, which means that maximum goodput, peak goodput, and sustained goodput are valid terms.

'Gross bit rate', however, is very specific. It is the product of the PHY frame payload symbol rate and the number of bits per symbol. For example, 4-QAM, 16-QAM, 64-QAM, 256-QAM, etc quadrature modulation symbols carry N = 2, 4, 6, 8, etc bits, respectively. The symbol rate R (in Baud, Bd) usually is equal for all cases (to keep the band-limited frequency band constant). So the gross bit rate = N*R. Note that PHY frame headers and tails generally use the lowest number of bits per symbol, and header signaling bits tell the receiver how to decode the payload symbols. Obviously, the gross bit rate is measured at the interface between the PHY and the data link layer (DLL).

For completion, note that 'net bit rate' is also very specific. It is the payload bit rate without channel coding forward error correction (FEC) (Hamming) bits. The coding ratio k = (number of data bits)/(number of data bits number of Hamming bits). Thus, the net bit rate = k * (gross bit rate). For systems like 802.11, channel coding is defined in the MAC sub-layer of the DLL. So, the net bit rate is measured at the interface between the MAC and logical link control (LLC) DLL sub-layers.

Regards,

DLA (talk) 20:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

This is interesting. Any suggestion on how to clarify this in the article? Actually I wrote most of the bit rate article. Don't hesitate to try to improve these articles.

At the data link layer layer in for example 802.11a, you have error detection codes and automatic repeat request. But the error-correcting codes (convolutional codes) are integrated with the OFDM modulation, and (to my understanding) consequently at the PHY layer. For example, normally we say that 802.11a has a bit rate of 54 Mbit/s, which is the net bit rate. However, the FEC rate is 3/4, meaning that the gross bit rate is 54 / (3/4) = 72 Mbit/s. If you include pilot carriers, synchronization, equalizer training, and other PHY layer overhead, the gross bit rate would be even higher than 72 Mbit/s.Mange01 (talk) 21:55, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

When I use Wikipedia and I see a small problem, I fix it. But, I already have an average 60-hour work week. So, being a major contributor to Wikipedia is not possible.

That said, here's some feedback re your above calculation:

First, there is a real difference between OFDM and DMT. OFDM was primarily a wireless term. DMT was a wired (DSL) term. Wireless used the same constellation diagram for all tones. DSL used different constellation diagrams for each tone, based upon the results of a training protocol. Training makes no sense for wireless. (These days, the term OFDM is being applied for both wireless and wired applications. So, OFDM has almost won the name war.) I'll talk only about 802.11a, which is OFDM.

Now, 802.11a uses BPSK, QPSK, 16-QAM and 64-QAM modulation, with 48 tones.

The MAC sub-layer channel coding includes scrambling, Reed–Solomon (RS) encoding, and convolutional coding (in that order for transmission and in the reverse order for reception).

Scrambling adds no Hamming bits. Convolutional coding has a coding rate of R. To use a single convolutional encoder, puncturing is used to remove a certain proportion of the convolutional coding Hamming bits. Thus, R is the ratio of the (data bits) / (data bits convolutional coding Hamming bits).

PHY-dependent MAC state machines reside in a sub-layer defined as the MAC sub-layer management entity (MLME). The MLME controls the PHY layer convergence protocol (PLCP) sub-layer of the PHY layer. The MLME creates the PLCP protocol data unit (PPDU), which consists of channel coded bits:

The PPDU consists of three parts: Preamble, Signal, and Data.

• The preamble is constant and, thus, not channel coded.
• The Signal part is only convolutional encoded with R = 1/2,
• The Data part is channel coded using scrambling and a convolution code, as described above, at a variable rate R.

The MLME causes the PLCP sub-layer to generate the Preamble (typically from memory). The MLME causes the PLCP sub-layer partition the coded signal bits into 48 parallel bit streams plus 4 added bit streams for pilot tones - one for each of 52 tones (carriers). The Signal part has one bit per symbol, the Data part has a variable number of bits per symbol (n-bit byte). The MLME causes the PLCP sub-layer to use a tone map to amplitude shift key (ASK) the bytes. The MLME causes the PLCP sub-layer use the ASK values to modulate the 52 orthogonal carriers and frequency division multiplex (FDM) the modulated signals onto a time domain signal.

The MLME causes the PLCP sub-layer to add a cyclic prefix to the time domain signal and then pulse shape it to form the symbol, for transmission over the medium.

As the PPDU's PLCP Preamble and Signal parts are always the same, the receiver's MLME already knows how to control the PLCP sub-layer to demodulate the Signal. The MAC channel decodes the Signal part. The Signal part of the PPDU includes a 4-bit rate parameter that the MLME uses to control the PLCP sub-layer demodulation of the Data part. Finally, the MAC channel decodes the Data part.

The 54 Mbps rate uses 64-QAM, which has 6 bits per symbol. As the symbol time is fixed at 4.0 microseconds, the gross bit rate = 48 * 6 / 4x10E-6 = 7.2E 7 bps.

The 54 Mbps rate also use convolution coding with R = 3/4. So, the net bit rate = 7.2E 7 * 3/4 = 5.4E 7. So, for 802.11a, the association rate is the net bit rate.

Finally, it's not so simple for DMT as each tone can have a different constellation diagram.

DLA (talk) 02:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

What you are explaining here should be mentioned in the IEEE 802.11a or IEEE 802.11 article!

I wrote in those two articles, as well as in the bit rate article, that the gross bitrate is up to 72 Mbit/s in 802.11a and 802.11g. I have been worried that I made a mistake when I wrote that. It was only my interpretation of the standard, I found no document that explicitly used the term gross bit rate in the context of 802.11. But you support me? Perhaps we should clarify in the article if there is any other PHY layer overhead that is not included in the gross bit rate.

Ok. RS inner error coding takes place at the data link layer, that is why we include it in the net bit rate of 54 Mbps, while the outer convolutional coding takes place at the PHY layer and is excluded from the 54 Mbps. We should clarify that in the articles. (MAC layer scrambling does not add any data.)

What is the reason for placing the RS error coding at the datalink layer? Because of HARQ?

You say that RS inner coding is part of the MAC layer. So its not part of LLC sublayer? Perhaps there is no LLC sublayer in 802.11, or the LLC functionality (flow control and ARQ) is fully integrated with the MAC layer CSMA/CA algorithm?

We share several common interests! I hope I explained the difference between DMT and OFDM in the OFDM article in a similar way as you did here.

I might once have been a major contributor to articles on wireless, telecom, etc, but these days I do not have time to contribute that much. Mange01 (talk) 07:41, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The above is something that I quickly threw together, using some copy-and-paste.

Note that 802.11a does NOT include Reed–Solomon (RS) encoding. (I missed cutting that one part out of a paste.)

The 802.11 standard defines only the MAC and PHY PLCP sub-layers to adapt the 802.1 LLC sub-layer.

Also, it's more complicated that what I presented above. I left out parts for lack of time and clarity.

Also, the PPDU's Data part has a Service field, the PLCP Service data unit (PSDU), tail bits and pad bits. The PSDU carries the MAC protocol data units (MPDUs), which carry the application data wrapped in other layers of protocol bits, not to mention gaps.

Manufacturers like to quote the highest data bit rates possible, for competitive reasons.

Finally, the 802.11 & 802.11a standards (which are now merged into a single document), present models for illustration purposes only. Implementers will implement their designs differently, for competitive reasons, so their final design won't look anything like the 802.11/a models.

Regards, DLA (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Libyan uprising

It isn't clear, partly because Gaddafi regime is not most open and does not let journalists go wherever they want , like Misrata where his soldiers are killing civilians maybe, but whatever if the intensity of U.N mandate bombing has led to many civilian casualties that should be dealt with. The BBC reporter John Simpson was shown today an alleged victim's farmhouse, the farmer said his 18 year old daughter had been hit , the gardener said it was a 4 year old. Simpson was not convinced - you have to be aware that Gaddafi is quite determined to use propaganda in this war. You should not have to put up with your additions to the article being deleted though, if they have RS references and spoke of the Arab League worries- though they are involved still with the U.N action I think - what did you add that got taken out? 92.4.54.195 (talk) 21:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

IEC Binary Prefixes

I too think the WP:EN policy on IEC Binary Prefixes is wrong but the deprecation zealots shout down all discussion. If you really can find some cites of recent EE or CS texts using or better yet changing to IEC Binary Prefixes then this maybe of sufficient weight to cause a change in the WP:MOSNUM policy. I would be particularly telling if such a change were made in a latest edition to one of the classics in this area. Tom94022 (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Technologies that already exist in the template Emerging technologies

Hi!

You have undone the edit by which I have added Computer animation to the template, arguing that this technology already exists.

I have added the item to the template because it is still developing so strongly that decisive improvements are still to be expected. Various sources have come to the conclusion that the capacity of current computers is still going to increase with the same pace as it has done over the last decades. The logical following of this would be that really decisive, maybe even fantastic new results should still be expected.

Nevertheless, the thing depends on where one sees the boundaries for the template. I would like to draw Your attention, therefore, to the fact that the template, at the moment, also contains links to other technologies that already exist. Examples are Cryonics, Electroencephalography, Full genome sequencing, 3-D film (inserted by me the last days), Holographic display, Energy storage, Renewable energy (here also three sub-items, Biofuels, Concentrated solar power, and Nantenna; biofuels could be kept in the template, as long as the term is used in plural, so far).

Maybe, we could say we are going to exclude all from the template that is already marketable — what about that? (See my suggestion on the template's talk page!) --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 22:19, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, the first running Basic program I wrote as a child in 1978 was a computer animation of rippels on the water (expanding concentric circles). So, from my point of view computer animation is not new. Mange01 (talk) 17:11, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Renaming Computer memory to Electronic memory

I just noticed you renamed the article Computer memory to Electronic memory, but the article is written as if it is still named Computer memory. Was there a discussion to review this change? What was the reason to justify it? § Music Sorter § (talk) 08:34, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do us all a favour: see 4G

I have reverted back to one of your last edits done before this idiotic new user "Flying9876" decided to mass-cockup the whole article, removing any of the historical info, and completely US-centralised it in favour of what can only be described as mostly rubbish. As your well-versed on the article and topic in general, I thought I'd give you the heads-up for you to check it through (unfortunately I haven't been following this for some time, so am probably not the best for such a task). --Jimthing (talk) 09:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Good move. I'm a little bit busy these days but I made an attempt to comment. Mange01 (talk) 17:07, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Crossbar switch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Televerket (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Channel (communications), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latency (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. When you recently edited 4G, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ericson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Channel access method (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Signalling and Carrier frequency

4G (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Multi-path

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Criticism of Google, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Orders of magnitude (sound pressure)

Can you move this section: Sound_pressure#Examples_of_sound_pressure_and_sound_pressure_levels into a new article named: Orders of magnitude (sound pressure) ? Currently there is an article for static pressure Orders of magnitude (pressure), but not for sound pressure (aka acoustic pressure). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.116.144.15 (talk) 15:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Why not do it yourself? I don't know the reason and background. Mange01 (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles Stark Draper Prize, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Martin Cooper and Joel Engel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Innocence of Muslims, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coptic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Asymptotic throughput (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to TCP, UDP, Latency and Flow control

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Akamai Technologies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SSL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Nyquist Number Request

Hi Mange. The mathematics behind the equation for the Nyquist rate or frequency is too difficult for me to process. I need a number somewhere around 32,000 frequency. My app - Talking Duke Dog 2 uses a complex Apple algorithm Remote IO for voice modulation to a higher frequency. It happens to go all scratchy after a certain other advertisement audio system joins in. I'm guessing a proper Nyquist number would do the trick, because 22,000 frequency never goes scratchy. So I could use some help please! I'll be happy to pay if you send me an email. My app is headed for the tops of the charts. [email protected] Rattletap (talk) 20:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 5G, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LTE (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Obama / drones

Please see Talk:Barack Obama#Drone attacks. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Multicast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to LTE and Multipoint

Surströmming (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rotting

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Salted fish may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[Surströmming]] (Lightly-salted soured Baltic herring]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:31, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Signal processing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sampling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Löfven Cabinet may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Your edits on RPG-7, PK machine gun and PKM

Hello. Please stop adding ISIS/ISIL as user to articles; blogs are not reliable sources, plus we only add countries to lists of users, not organisations. Thank you. Thomas.W ^talk 13:59, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Data transmission, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Point-to-point. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Notification of pagemove

I am notifying you about the page move that you had made on Indo-Aryan migration hypothesis is now being discussed, see Talk:Indo-Aryan migration hypothesis#Requested move 14 January 2015. Bladesmulti (talk) 06:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I am also inclined to think that 'hypothesis' might be a better term. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fair queuing, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Fairness, Router and FIFO. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Network emulation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Network analyzer. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 24 April 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) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rurik dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nordic people. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mange01. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mange01. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Emerging standards has been nominated for discussion

Category:Emerging standards, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 15:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Impediment to expulsion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Expulsion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Electronic identification, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mange01. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Spectral efficiency comparison table

Template:Spectral efficiency comparison table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Steel1943 (talk) 01:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Path loss

An article that you have been involved in editing—Path loss—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Pierre cb (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Acts of Pilate

Hello, Mange01,

Thank you for creating Acts of Pilate.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please add category for Acts of Pilate.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|ZI Jony}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Warm Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 13:03, 11 September 2020 (UTC)