User talk:WiFiEngineer
This page has been blanked. WiFiEngineer (talk) 21:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, like the inputs below, I am new to WP and was only trying to add what I beleive is legitimate information. I wasnt trying to start an edit war. The first messaage I got back told me my inputs had been rejected automatically and I should re enter them. Next thing I know is I am being accused of an edit war when I am guilty of nothing more than ignorance of WP. What do I need to do to get my edits added? |author=
Kurob60== Discussion relating to: Comparison of Wireless Site Survey Products ==
WiFiEngineer:
I'd just like to explain myself. I didn't see this as an edit war. I saw that you had undone my edits and listed that my changes weren't verified by any references. So, I simply redid my changes and listed references. There wasn't anything malicious in my intent. I thought I was doing what you asked.
I'm actually not trying to hide the fact that I'm the owner of VisiWave. I simply had no idea that being linked to the product made it so I couldn't contribute what I believed to be useful information to WP. And I didn't/don't see anything wrong with listing a reference to a product's website as a valid source. I don't understand how that is different than a reference to a product's user's guide.
Obviously this whole "conflict" is because we differ in our definition of active surveys. To be honest, I hate the terms active and passive surveys. They confuse customers all the time. Unless AirMagnet has ingrained their definitions into their heads already, technical users assume an active survey uses active scanning and a passive survey uses passive scanning. This isn't the case. Most importantly, passive surveys use active scanning (clients send probe requests). It's just confusing. To be honest, that is why I have always chosen to ignore those terms in my product. And why you don't see any references any where to the terms.
I re-read several definitions of active surveys before making my changes yesterday. They usually say that you are associated with an AP, provide performance information, and additional things like packet loss and retransmissions. VisiWave does all of those things, albeit the performance testing is fairly limited (it lists how long it takes to send a small packet of data to the AP). Maybe a footnote saying "limited performance testing"?
I actually tried to go to your "talk" page yesterday first to discuss this, but it looked like your talk page was disabled (now I see I simply didn't know how to add something to it). So I just made the changes and tried to explain my reasoning in the limited space in the change comment.
No hard feelings. We just have a difference of opinion and I have admittedly very limited knowledge of WP.
Mdyk (talk) 14:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Ekahau Site Survey[edit]
Hello, WiFiEngineer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ekahau Site Survey".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:54, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
The article Comparison of wireless site survey applications has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of risk analysis Microsoft Excel add-ins (2nd nomination)
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)