Template:Did you know nominations/Dahlander pole changing motor

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 06:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Dahlander pole changing motor[edit]

(
)

Created by Shrikanthv (talk). Self nominated at 10:44, 2 December 2014 (UTC).

  • New enough, long enough, and free of any apparent policy issues (the article is neutral, appears to be well cited, and is free of any noticeable copyright infringement or close paraphrasing). However, four of the references are to books that I do not have access to, so I am accepting them in good faith. Furthermore, a couple of the websites feature patent documents that are in German, which I unfortunately cannot read, so I am accepting those citations in good faith as well.
One apparent issue, however, is that two of the ISBNs appear to be incorrect. The Toliyat and Kliman book has the same ISBN as the (first) Boy and Flachmann reference, while the two references to (apparently the same) Boy and Flachmann book are different. It looks to me that this is a simple case of two ISBNs being flipped, and once they are flipped back, the issue will be resolved. I would really appreciate it if Shrikanthv, as the nominator, could take a look at this.
The hook and alternate are short enough, cited in the article (although I am again accepting the print and German sources in good faith), and both seem interesting to me. Of the two, I think the first (main) hook is perhaps a bit more interesting. QPQ appears to not apply because Shrikanthv has fewer than four previous DYK nominations (please correct me if I am wrong). Once the ISBN issue has been resolved, I will be happy to support this nomination, with the caveat that I am accepting most of the references in good faith. Michael Barera (talk) 22:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Just corrected ISBN's, I had copy pasted references and changed its content some how forgot to change ISBN , updated it I did not find German books online but found the english one here and german ISBN here and here Shrikanthv (talk) 05:56, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Shrikanthv! That resolves my only quibble with the nomination. Accepting the book and German-language references in good faith, I think that this article is good to go! Michael Barera (talk) 19:39, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The Application section is completely unreferenced. Yoninah (talk) 17:49, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Just for clarification, for the purposes of DYK, are lists within articles held to the same citation standards as prose sections? It looks like the answer is yes, but I'd just like to make sure. Michael Barera (talk) 21:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes. See Rule D2: The article in general should use inline, cited sources. A rule of thumb is one inline citation per paragraph, excluding the intro, plot summaries, and paragraphs which summarize other cited content. Yoninah (talk) 21:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the clarification, Yoninah. I've just run into the plot summary exception on another review, and I've known about the intro/summary paragraph exception for quite some time. Still, my apologies for not yet perfecting the art of the DYK review. I'm trying to improve, though. Michael Barera (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
*Hi Yoninah & Michael Barera , I am in little bit of dilemma on what to do now ? , I do have references for the application but they are all from companies both big and small like siemens, schneider ,ABB, Baumüller... but have gotten err from other editors by adding there manuals and training materials as references as there were considered "commercial" links , I will try to see if there is any sources are available in books but most of realistic stuff are available in manual from these companies how to go about it ??? Shrikanthv (talk) 06:04, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • For this kind of list, a manual seems like an acceptable reference. I have only questioned manual sources in the past when they are used to support whole paragraphs of copy. Yoninah (talk) 09:58, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • have updated with a book reference please have a look the PAM motors is just similar to this motor and the book describes its usual application, there is problem with using technical manuals e.g here , as it would contain only wiring and technical specification and nothing related to where its being used or should be used ! I just found some links mentioning that like this one 1 2 and they come under broucher may be commercial ? . do let me know if the book reference suffices your requirmentShrikanthv (talk) 13:14, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The book reference looks good, but it doesn't mention the same applications (other than pumps, and perhaps fans) as the article. I think the WEG specifications could be referenced here. There's nothing wrong with citing the subject's own website (or, in this case, manufacturer's specifications) for details like these. Yoninah (talk) 13:29, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

In the second para from the book cited it does mention marginally about milling maschines and other two speed applications but any way thanks for updating on the application will update this with WEG Shrikanthv (talk) 13:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

  • The cites are now in order, thanks. I did a little searching on Google and found a preview of the 2nd edition of Handbook of Electric Motors, so I substituted it in the referencing. I also added a cite from another online book, Electric Drive: Design Metholodogy. You may wish to look at these refs to see if any more could be added from them to the article.
  • Regarding the hook, the first hook is verified and cited inline. For the second hook, the part about him being a Swedish inventor is not cited inline (i.e., at the end of the sentence in which the information appears). Yoninah (talk) 17:55, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Just added the required citation again its not available in english :( Shrikanthv (talk) 12:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you. ALT1 hook fact is both verified and AGF (for the foreign-language source on "Swedish invention") and cited inline. I prefer ALT1. Rest of review criteria have been checked and approved by Michael Barera. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 23:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Dahlander_pole_changing_motor&oldid=808462474"