User talk:Schvanger

June 2020
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Sawtooth wave has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Sawtooth wave was changed by Schvanger (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.909683 on 2020-06-30T19:38:05+00:00

Referencing one's edits
I note that you are relatively new to editing Wikipedia. In view of that, I think it proper to draw your attention to a few things to observe when you decide to add to, or alter any material in an article.

First, any material that you add must be supported by a reliable and verifiable source supporting the edit that you make (See WP:VERIFY and WP:RELIABLE for more). Ideally it should be a secondary source and not a primary source, but there are circumstances where a primary source is allowed (See WP:PRIMARY and WP:SECONDARY). Any editor is fully entitled to remove any material that is not supported by an inline reference, though anything that has been present but unreferenced for a long time is best left undisturbed as it is regarded as accepted by consensus.

I should, perhaps, draw your attention to WP:BRD. Though not an official policy as such, it is often relied upon to settle disputes. Basically if you make an edit and someone reverts it, you must not reinstate the edit but start a discussion on the article talk page to seek a consensus on what should or should not be claimed. If you do get involved in a dispute (and it will happen), the editor who discusses will always (well - usually!) win out against an edit warrior.

Second, it is absolutely unacceptable to publish your own original research in Wikipedia (See WP:ORIGINAL for more). This includes self published works from yourself or other authors; anything from any web site that constitutes any form of blog and (importantly) anything that you yourself have discovered.

For your own home built Maxwell coil, had you read earlier parts of Maxwell's paper, you would have discovered why your coil probably gave different results to Maxwell's description. He stated that the uniformity of field in any coil system is greatly affected by small constructional errors. By that he meant; the inability to put the three coils exactly on the surface of the virtual sphere; the inability to make the coils perfectly circular and the inability to make a coil behave as though it is a solid conductor etc.

In the practical world, it has been generally found that a Helmholtz coil works as well as (or better than) a Maxwell coil because with only two coils there is less scope for constructional error.

Having said all that, I can at least welcome you to Wikipedia and wish you good luck in contributing to and improving the project. Though a bit late, I attach the templated 'new editor information' where you may find some more useful information. -RFenergy (talk) 11:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I will stop all further attempts to make false information true. You won't see me on Wikipedia anymore. Sorry. Schvanger (talk) 16:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)