Talk:ISO 2852: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:43, 30 December 2011

Valua of google image search?

I do not believe that Google image search for ISO 2852 (under External links) adds any value to the article. Not all of images are relevant to the standard, and those that are offer no useful information; basically they are just pictures of pipes or connectors. I deleted the link (replacing it the ISO catalog link), but DMahalko put it back so that "non-engineers can see what this is without shelling out cash for the standard". However I disagree that the images tell us anything useful about the standard. If we put meaningful content in the article, readers will know what the standard is about (for free). I can't comment on the existing article content, because I don't have a copy of the standard, and I am not familiar with the topic. (DMahalko, perhaps if you cited whatever reference you have got as to the contents of the standard, that would be helpful.)

Can I have a third (fourth, etc) editor's opinion on this please. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References? We need those? Nah. I worked with ISO 2852 for most of my childhood. I was assigned the job of washing the dairy farm bulk tank before milking. Have to take apart and put together ISO 2852 stainless steel pipeline fittings for every milking and every washing. So while I have never seen the standard, I KNOW what this is.

You deleted the link without explanation. That's bad form for a professional editor. It's almost as bad as not listing references. Tsk tsk.

As far as pictures go, I am likely going to be taking some pictures of that dairy pipeline I've been working with all these years and including them in this article. No, the pictures won't tell you the exact dimensions or properties of the standard but they will show what it looks like, and how it can be used, and that's good enough to me.

If you want comment from other editors, this is the wrong place to ask, as I just created the article and traffic is likely to be low until search engines start finding it. You may not get a response here for a long time.

DMahalko (talk) 06:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Can I have a third (fourth, etc) editor's opinion on this please. [[User:Mitch Ames|Mitch Ames]] ([[User talk:Mitch Ames|talk]]) 05:20, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
+: References? We need those? Nah. I worked with ISO 2852 for most of my childhood. I was assigned the job of washing the dairy farm bulk tank before milking. Have to take apart and put together ISO 2852 stainless steel pipeline fittings for every milking and every washing. So while I have never seen the standard, I KNOW what this is.
+: You deleted the link without explanation. That's bad form for a professional editor. It's almost as bad as not listing references. Tsk tsk.
+: As far as pictures go, I am likely going to be taking some pictures of that dairy pipeline I've been working with all these years and including them in this article. No, the pictures won't tell you the exact dimensions or properties of the standard but they will show what it looks like, and how it can be used, and that's good enough to me.
+: If you want comment from other editors, this is the wrong place to ask, as I just created the article and traffic is likely to be low until search engines start finding it. You may not get a response here for a long time.
+: [[User:DMahalko|DMahalko]] ([[User talk:DMahalko|talk]]) 06:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)