Talk:Fraunhofer Society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

MP3 development date[edit]

The year 2000 marked a noteworthy success at Fraunhofer-Institut for Integrated Circuits (IIS): the development of MP3, the widely adopted method for coding and compressing of audio data. Wasn't mp3 developed in 1991, as the mp3 page states? At least I remember using it prior to 2000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.151.73.104 (talkcontribs) 01:46, 9 February 2006 - MP3 page speaks about call for proposals' lasting to 1991, but MPx formats were standardised in 1992. There is no mentioning of Fraunhofer having something with the development (page of Fraunhofer claims different), though, only mentioning the l3enc encoder from 1994. Anyway, I "correct" the date stated above to 1992, hoping it's correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Picasso Pablo (talkcontribs) 17:58, 5 April 2006 - Hey, the translation from German was incorrect :). Read it now... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Picasso Pablo (talkcontribs) 18:15, 5 April 2006

[edit]

Can someone upload the logo of the institute! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.161.113 (talkcontribs) 21:44, 14 February 2006

Otto Mohr[edit]

The link to Otto Mohr is false.. I don't know how to fix it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.207.160.237 (talkcontribs) 08:31, 31 March 2006

-> I noticed it too, it directs to another Otto Mohr, one from te 19th century — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anzbevrct (talkcontribs) 19:54, 9 July 2006

Number of institutes[edit]

The list of "60 Fraunhofer Institutes" contains 66 or 67 entries; I changed the list heading to say "over sixty" and it was changed back by someone who claims some entries are only facilities of the 60 Institutes. If that's the case, the list title is false, since it refers to the entries on the list as Institutes (if some aren't, the heading is wrong; if all are, the count is). This requires more specific knowledge of which facilities on the list are not independent institutes... currently this list, in a sense the core of the specific practical info of the article, is somewhat incoherent as a result. The entries themselves are unclear and not really labeled; in my judgement further work and verification is required here. Grinq (talk) 22:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain t/c 18:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)



Fraunhofer SocietyFraunhofer-Gesellschaft – Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft does not use a translated brand name in english, they use their normal Name Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft or Fraunhofer if it only the brand logo is used. See also http://www.fraunhofer.de/en.html
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  — Amakuru (talk) 10:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Jjaervin (talk) 10:06, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment gsearch "Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft" (362k) "Fraunhofer Institute" (265k) "Fraunhofer Society" (288k) "Fraunhofer Institut" (310k) -- seems pretty much a wash as to usage. -- 70.24.244.51 (talk) 05:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment The Institutes are seperate entities, Fraunhofer society as a brand name does not really exist and the Wikipedia page should reflect the correct term — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjaervin (talkcontribs) 13:15, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose With mixed usage as demonstrated by the IP, I'm fine ignoring the official name in favor of English. "Gesellschaft" to "Society" is a fairly direct translation, anyway. --BDD (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Usage could go either way, but as Fraunhofer is also used on its own, Fraunhofer Society is the more recognisable to English readers generally. The arguments based on what is correct are contrary to policy, but this probably needs to be put more clearly than it is currently. Andrewa (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment As a german I can't really tell which name is more common in english, but a redirecht would keep the more common english name Fraunhofer Society, while redirecting to Fraunhofer, which I assume is just as common and correct? Jjaervin (talk) 10:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjaervin (talkcontribs) 10:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Comment in reply: There is already a redirect here from Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, while Fraunhofer is a disambiguation page. If the page were to be moved, yes a redirect should be left. But there seems to be neither justification nor support for the move. No change of vote. Andrewa (talk) 08:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
But do English-language sources refer to Société Générale as "General Society"? --BDD (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fraunhofer Society. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Infobox type[edit]

This article uses an {{infobox company}} template despite being an incorporated society (e V). Should it not use an {{infobox organization}} or {{infobox laboratory}} template? If someone agrees, perhaps they can change it? Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 23:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)