User talk:Drizzd~enwiki

Welcome!

Hello,, 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: 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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! – Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Low-pass filter
Regarding your reversion, of course it makes a difference what it was designed for. That's a bit like saying a brick is an example of a paperweight. No it isn't, you can use it as a paperweight but it is still a brick. Frankly, I don't think it should be in there at all - it would be more straightforward to say that a simple RC circuit is an example of a one-pole filter. And if we are talking about an ideal integrator, that really does not have any useful filtering characteristics as it is going to attenuate everything above DC!  Sp in ni ng  Spark  02:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * So your analogy does not make any sense. A brick is rarely a paperweight. But an integrator is always a low pass filter. It is a very general concept that is not specific to electric circuits. It is also very common. That makes it the perfect example of a low-pass filter.


 * I still do not understand your issue with the current wording, but perhaps the following would be more to your taste? "An integrator has low-pass filter characteristics." --Drizzd (talk) 08:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * That's what I was trying to say in the edit you reverted. It really is the case that an integrator only acts as an LPF when it is a non-ideal integrator.  An RC circuit is a filter, and also approximates to an integrator within a certain range.  But an op-amp integrator circuit comes close to an ideal integrator which will have a 1/f frequency response.  The pole is at f=0 and that will also be the knee frequency.  That is, an ideal integrator is not a low-pass filter, it is a DC-pass filter!  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  10:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * If you are still not convinced, try considering what an ideal integrator will do to a square pulse in the time domain compared to what you expect from an ideal (brick-wall) filter.  Sp in ni ng  Spark  10:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * If my suggested wording above is what you were trying to say, then let's go with it. Why are we still talking?


 * I am not buying your argument with the ideal interpolator, however. That's a special case in this context just like the ideal interpolator is a special case of interpolation. And it's not even a counter-example, because it can still be interpreted as a low pass filter, albeit with a rather low corner frequency. --Drizzd (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Also, do you have a citation for this claim? There should be nothing going into Wikipedia that cannot be referenced to a reliable source. Material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.  Sp in ni ng  Spark  10:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, hold on. Previously, we have been discussing the best wording for the relationship between integrator and low pass filter. But now you are disputing that the idea of an integrator acting as a low pass filter has merit at all? Please stop wasting my time. --Drizzd (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no need for the bad temper. There is a place for this, but it needs a better explanation than just a misleading listing as an example.  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  16:59, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Plastic SCM
Hi, is there any reason why you have removed the information i put in the scm comparison about Plastic SCM? dont we have the right to put there our information just like the rest of companies there? You´re doing so continually, so tell justo tell my why.Alejandro66 (talk) 17:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * ironically enough, there's more than one editor reverting changes to promote Plastic SCM. TEDickey (talk) 00:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a matter of policy. Please see the talk page, as I already commented in the revert. --Drizzd (talk)


 * I was referring to the probable sockpuppets who've been promoting it for a while. TEDickey (talk) 23:09, 18 September 2010 (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). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. 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) 21:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Drizzd. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Drizzd~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:20, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)