Talk:Air bearing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article created - now to improve it![edit]

@Davidwr, Aerobearing, and Thgoiter: I just want to say that this is one of the better articles I have reviewed, and also that davidwr did a fantastic job shepherding this to the level of approval, and with humility. Aerobearing has also been very patient and very responsive. Both of you show passion for this, the author for the subject, and the reviewer for helping out and very fine attention to detail.

I have requested speedy deletion of Air bearing and Air bearings, so that this article can move there. In the mean time, it has one of its alternate name from lede. I've added a {{Main}} hatnote to the air bearing section of Fluid bearing.

Now, it's time to make the article better. I think it has potential for GA-class, and could be front page feature material. Even as it is, if we can find the right hook for the article in the next five days, we can get it to the DID YOU KNOW on the front page. I would suggest something like "Did you know that you can machine bearings out of nothing at all?"

With in-line references throughout the article (there is only one today), it will qualify for WP:Good article, as I think it meets all other criteria for "GA" status. It probably needs a more in-depth overview section, including some history and information on research and researchers.

With some attention to style and language and detail, and especially some lede improvements, it could further attain WP:Featured article status. Less than 1/10 of 1% of articles get there, and this one has that potential.

- Dovid (talk) 06:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did some copyediting. I think that a B-class rating is very, very generous at this point (one in-line reference, language problems) but the article has good potential. There were a few grammar or style issues that I didn't fix because I am not familiar with this technology and I didn't want to inadvertently change the meaning of something. I noticed that sometimes the article uses words like "tremendous", which generally requires a reference. I took out some references to "you" and "we" - those are generally not appropriate for an encyclopedia.
One final question: Should the article be titled "aerodynamic bearings"? That sounds a lot more natural to me, but it could be a regional variation or something. EricEnfermero HOWDY! 08:38, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@EricEnfermero: It meets B-class by the definition of the Articles for Creation rating guidelines. The name is now Air bearing, it was only temporarily named Aerodynamical bearing, because the existing redirect at that named needed to be speedy deleted at the time I approved it. I'm in full agreement with you on what needs to be improved. Dovid (talk) 14:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree about the B-class rating and downgraded it to C. Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment (B-class assessment criteria) requires articles be suitably referenced. This article is under-referenced and it's not clear what material is being backed up by which reference. Although Wikipedia does not require English-language references, it is very difficult for a non-English-reader to follow non-English references unless they are both "inline" and readily translatable (e.g. Google translate) or there are snippets and translations of snippets either used as direct quotations or embedded in the reference itself. Also, WikiProject Technology's template requires that the page be formally assessed to get higher than a C rating. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What you are pointing out is a bug in the AfC process. The article is B-class per AfC project rules, but C-class on WP as a whole. This creates a conflict, as apparently the article class is set by the script for more than just AfC. Should probably be discussed on the AfC talk page. Dovid (talk) 17:47, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to get this to GA (and later, FA) status, please post a note on the talk pages of the relevant WikiProjects (except AFC, they are busy with un-reviewed submissions) if you have not already done so. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dovid - When I scroll up to the AfC project rating area on this page and click on "More detailed criteria", it seems unambiguous to me that B-class articles require suitable referencing. Is there a different place that has separate criteria? Thanks! EricEnfermero HOWDY! 08:16, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Davidwr, Dovid, EricEnfermero, and Thgoiter:, finally the article got approved!!Thanks a lot to all of you for helping me getting it done. You can count me in for improving this article and trying to get it to the DID YOU KNOW section.

I looked threw your comments:

  • i know an american technician with who I can make improvements to the article language.------>done
  • i have information on the history of air bearings (research + researchers) but I don't know how fast I am going to be able to post it in the article...
  • Everything you read in this article is proved by the first reference of Bernd Schulz which is also the main and most important one.The reference is a doctor thesis which is certified in Germany. The reference of "Joachim Klement" is ok but it's not covering the hole Article since he just copy pasted a part of Mister Schulzes work in his book.

Here you have some more information about the book and the proof of his work:

  • I will ask the founders if they meanwhile have found some english references(i already asked if they had some), but since they are german and did all their work in Germany, I am not sure that they will have something for me...Otherwise i also already searched the web and coudn't find anything reliable besides two articles from NASA and a book:

I will continue looking.

In the european wikipedia we have a very nice gallery http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:Galerie for all of the pictures. Unfortunatly it is not compatible with the american version(looks really good).

I will do all of this today and tomorrow. If there is anything additional that I can do or if you have questions, please askAerobearing (talk) 09:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To reference a bare URL, use one colon, not two, and put a space instead of a | between the URL and the name to display, like this: [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:Galerie Gallery], which will appear as Gallery. However, since it's a sister Wikipedia, you can use a normal WikiLink but put :de: in front of the page name, like so: [[:de:Vorlage:Galerie]], which will appear as de:Vorlage:Galerie.
The English-language Wikipedia does support galleries but by longstanding custom, they are discouraged except in certain circumstances (see History of the flags of the United States for an example of where a gallery is appropriate in the English Wikipedia). Instead, the English Wikipedia encourages the use of specific pictures near the text that is relevant to the image, and a link to the Wikimedia commons. This article does both. The Commons also has the ability to host a page about a general topic (see commons:Flags of the United States for an example). Instead of a page, it may be more useful just to add introductory text to commons:category:Air bearings, as more people are likely to see that than to visit a non-image, non-category page on the Commons. Hosting gallery- or gallery-like pages on the Commons has another advantage: You can put the text in multiple languages and use the translation facilities of the Commons so that the viewer sees the text in his or her preferred language if the text is available in that language. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:47, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance that doctors thesis can be put online without having to go through a paywall? In the United States the answer would probably be "no" as the academic publishers have long-standing relationships with many universities requiring that the copyright be assigned to the publisher. But I'm asking anyways. Once it gets online, people who don't speak German can use machine-translations to get a rough idea of what it is saying. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A possible way to improve the referencing: If a given section comes out of an entire chapter or page range of the Ph.D. thesis, add an inline-citation after the last period of the section and do something like this: <ref name=Schulz />{{rp|Ch.2}} or <ref name=Schulz />{{rp|42-86, App. A}} (of course, the first time you use the reference it will need to be filled out completely). "Rp" stands for "reference page." See {{rp}} for details. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see most of the references have two titles, implying that the reference is in both German and English. If the actual reference is only in German, please add the language= and translated_title= parameters (I don't think this will work for the patent reference, but you can try). Also consider adding a quote= parameter (followed by a translation in brackets (e.g. quote=Willkommen in Deutschland [Welcome to Germany]) for in-line references of non-English sources. For the thesis and other highly technical works, consider adding a laysummary= parameter if a layman's summary is available online. Also, if you can replace the type=Doctorate line in the "cite thesis" template with the actual type of degree (e.g. "Ph.D.") that would be helpful as well. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:13, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very difficult and frustrating to read. I've tried to work on the english a bit but I just don't have the expertise to parse half of the stuff that's written here. For example "In order to provide confidence and for the first investigations, an initial conversion from a conventional oil-guided turbo charger into air-guided was done. For a real future version, the use of results obtained from high-temperature solutions, mass products (proved production costs) and high-frequency spindles (know-how of dynamic background) will be very helpful." What? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.68.130.64 (talk) 07:25, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References, encyclopedic external links, or non-encyclopedic external links[edit]

The last two references have me wondering if they are actually references or if they should be classified as external links or removed altogether:

  • Air bearing Youtube Video channel
  • Aerolas.de: "Air bearings yesterday, today and tomorrow"

Self-promotional material, including most YouTube pages, are generally discouraged and should be removed unless they are actually useful. If one or both of these web sites actually backs up something that is not backed up with a reliable, independent source and it itself is a reliable independent source, then turn it into an in-line reference. If one or both of these actually backs up something that is not backed up at all, then turn it into an inline reference but hunt for a reliable, independent reference to replace it as soon as possible. If neither of these apply, simply remove it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:18, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Davidwr:,Thanks for the advice. I tried to add the parameters like you advised me in the last paragraph, but I'm not sure that I did it right. The last two references mainly support the descriptions and related diagrams used in the examples. However, they could also be included as external links. Meanwhile, the inventor send me one english reference of his which i think is what you call a layman's summary . I will ask if they can post the doctoral thesis of Bernd Schulz on the web, but I don't think that it will be possible.Aerobearing (talk) 12:48, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Impartiality and accuracy[edit]

Having looked over the article I would raise some issues about the impartiality of the wording and the very obvious positioning of a company name within the diagrams and photographs. On the same note I would like, as others have requested, to be able to look over the thesis referred to in the article. --Angstrom24 (talk) 11:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Angstrom24: while on an internship at the company named Aerolas last summer, I was given the right to use their material to make an informative wikipedia site (You can read this on my users page). You can look at following “English” article in the web at SPIE digital library that covers this article which is written by Bernd Schulz. Otherwise you can also purchase the thesis at VDI-Fortschritt berichte verlag, which is a certified German publishing house or under this ISBN number:9783183525027.Aerobearing (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aero, I think you are within your rights to use the thesis as reliable source material, as a thesis at a solid university is always reviewed by a reliable subject matter expert (or should be). And WP rules do allow for non-electronic sources. However, you should consider quoting small parts of the these that illustrate the points for which you use the thesis. It will make others more confident in the article, and provide benefit to any reader. Quoting small excepts to prove points is considered fair use in the United States and Canada. As far as the images with the company name, see if you can versions without the stamp on it. While technically allowed, some people don't like it when it seems promotional. Alternatively, if the article shows materials from competitors, and is therefore seen as balancing all commercial interests, the images with the company name on them should be OK. Dovid (talk) 09:59, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Dovid: I quoted smaller parts with page number references. I believe this essentially aligns with your suggestion. Since I now only have contact infrequently with the Aerolas Team and less spare time, I am unable to obtain or shoot other pictures at this moment. Perhaps in january i will be out at the company and i will try to get some pictures.Aerobearing (talk) 16:59, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good plan. For the thesis material, what I meant was that you should put short quotations in the references, wth page numbers. If they come from different places in the thesis, then use separate references... there is a template that simplifies that, and I can help you with that if need be. Dovid (talk) 02:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Dovid: please send the template, i'll take a look at it. Thanks.Aerobearing (talk) 16:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The harv parameter and sfn template can help you. You give one reference using normal citation templates, then the rest can be the simple sfn reference. Just make sure to include ref=harv in the original references. Yo don't need to name your references to do this, the templates take care of the ref names.

You can also move the "main reference" to the end (without surrounding ref and /ref). I'll give a mixed example below. The key is to have all the author names and the year. In the main reference, use |last= and |year= (add |last2= for a second author). In the sfn template, you just list all the author last names as unnamed template parameters, then add the year as a parameter after that, and finally add any page or chapter information as the final parameter.

NOTE: You must use the ref=harv parameter in Cite bok (main reference), or it will not generate the common link used by the other footnotes.

Article text 1. [1]

Article text 2. [2]

Article text 3 -- note that since the first ref appeared earlier, it combined the refs (repeats the ref number). [1] [3]


Article text 4. [4] [5]

Article text 5. [6]

Article text 5, repeated ref again. [4]

References[edit]

  • Schulz, Bernd (1999). Herstellung von aerostatischen Lagern mit Laserendbearbeitung (Ph.D.) (in German). Germany: VDI Verlag. ISBN 3-18-352502-X. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)
  1. ^ a b Schulz 1999, pp. 59–62.
  2. ^ Schulz 1999, p. 10.
  3. ^ Schulz, Bernd; Muth, M. (1997). Dynamically optimized air bearings manufactured with the laser beam (Ph.D.). Germany: SPIE. p. 15. ISBN 0819425222. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  4. ^ a b Schulz & Muth 1997, p. 15.
  5. ^ Schulz 1999, pp. 9–12, but note contrast to data in Appendix A.
  6. ^ Schulz & Muth 1997, See notes to Appendix B.

@Dovid:I inserted the harv parameter and the sfn template. I hope this aligns with your advice.Aerobearing (talk) 18:31, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Dovid (talk) 06:25, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Air_bearing&oldid=1204623272"