This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk page
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I was going by the spellings such as "labour" and the "-lly" ending already in the article. I did not see any unquestionably US spellings, so currently the article is UK spelling. That seems to have been established for a long time. WP:RETAIN does not say anything about the nationality of the first author. It advises against changing an established style. In the event of a dispute we should look at "the first post-stub contributor to introduce text written in a particular English variety". Is there a dispute? SpinningSpark 00:34, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I questioned the pronouncement; I'm not big one way or the other. Using your word, there is one instance of "labour" and two instances of "labor". Glrx (talk) 23:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
There is? I missed that. Looking at the history, the first insertion of "labor" was in this rather substantial series of edits by user Hydrargyrum so I guess that means we should use US English. I have reverted my edit. Someone should go through the article and make it consistent, preferably a native US speaker. SpinningSpark 00:07, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
I added some useful topics about precautions while using PCBs. Those has been removed. Please let me know the issue with the edits User talk:Pcbapc— Preceding undated comment added 07:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Start by reading some of our guidelines: WP:V, WP:HOWTO, and MOS:YOU. That should explain most of where you are going wrong. SpinningSpark 11:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The current text on patterning method by volume contains the following:
Silk screen printing–the main commercial method.
Photoengraving–used when fine linewidths are required.
I do not believe that silk screen printing is the main method, I believe photo-engraving is. (The statement is unreferenced.) I know quite a number of manufacturers, and few use silk screen printing, but I have no statistics, proof or references. Consequently, I am not comfortable to make statements about this. Still, I would like to change the text as follows, sidestepping the volume question.
Photoengraving – used when fine line widths are required.
Silk screen printing – used for PCBs with thicker lines.
Are there burning objections? Or does anyone has references about this?