User talk:ÄDA - DÄP

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

Hello, ÄDA - DÄP, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or Insert-signature.png or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 15:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating SM UB-143, ÄDA - DÄP!

Wikipedia editor Gbawden just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

You should add the WPSHIPS tag on the talk page in between double { brackets to add it to WikiProject Ships

To reply, leave a comment on Gbawden's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Karl-Friedrich Merten[edit]

Hi, do you have insight on his post World War II trial by the French? It might be worth some more context. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately not, the only place I can think of where to find more information would be his autobiography. I may have a chance on laying my hands on one in a couple of weeks. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 07:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for checking MisterBee1966 (talk) 10:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I made some additions (up to the section "U-boat commander"). May I ask you to check translations? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
WGP ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 18:31, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Question, I intended to write the article in US English. I think the ranks should therefore translate to the US equivalent not the Royal Navy equivalent. Example Oberleutnant zur See should be Lieutenant (junior grade) not Sub-Lieutenant. Are you okay with this? MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:51, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Sorry to bother you again. What do you know of Merten and his difference of opinions with Lothar-Günther Buchheim? Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Not to worry. The "Buchheim wave" was a bit before my time, but Hadley seems to have a pretty good account of their differences of opinion here. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 15:26, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

von Stockhausen[edit]

Do you know if the brother (or other relation) of Hans-Gerrit von Stockhausen is de:Hans Gottfried von Stockhausen? MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

It seems that Hans-Gottfried and Hans-Ludwig are his brothers from the marriage of Generalmajor Hans-Abalbert v. Stockhausen to Eleonore v. Baumbach. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 11:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Ship endurance[edit]

Please check your edit at SM U-132 which seems to have broken {{endurance}}. I would fix it, but it looks like you are doing lots of these and should examine the issue. The visible problem is that the infobox currently displays "[convert: invalid number]" (twice). Johnuniq (talk) 09:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that, but perhaps I did not explain the situation clearly because similar breakages occurred during your other recent edits, and there are 20 broken articles:

SM U-53SM U-55SM U-61SM UB-2SM UB-3SM UB-4SM UB-5SM UB-6SM UB-7SM UB-8SM UB-9SM UB-10SM UB-11SM UB-12SM UB-13SM UB-14SM UB-16SM UB-17SM UB-43SM UC-56

Johnuniq (talk) 11:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pest, but things are not getting any better. Please see SM UC-27 where the infobox is completely broken, and Category:Convert invalid units which lists 33 pages with invalid converts, starting from SM UC-1. It seems that nearly all your edits, at least in the last month, have been with automated tools, and I see a post from Redrose64 above saying there were at least some other problems. I'm sure you are aware that when making automated edits, it is important to carefully check at least some of the resulting articles to see that no systematic errors have been introduced. Johnuniq (talk) 11:29, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Bots[edit]


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Recent edits to German ship articles[edit]

I don't know why you're making the changes you are - PD is never used in the context of ships, IHP/SHP is the standard measure for marine propulsion systems. Also, why are you adding commas to convert templates? They already render appropriately. Parsecboy (talk) 11:54, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

And whats worse is your edits have introduced errors - take Brandenburg-class battleship for example: you changed 10,000 ihp (7,500 kW) to 10,000 PS (9,900 ihp). These will all need to be fixed. Parsecboy (talk) 12:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Yep, that's true, except that we have the metric system here in Europe (A "Quarterpounder with Cheese" pops to mind). That is why I am converting PS into ihp/shp/bhp as appropriate. The problem is, that some genius simply translated "Pferdestärken" (735.49875 W) into "horse power" (745.699881448 W) without making the necessary adjustments, leaving us 10 W short on the base unit. Now the obvious way is to convert PS into kW and then to ihp etc.

Thanks for waiting BTW ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 12:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but as I said, PS is never used in the context of marine engines - it might well be appropriate for an article on a Volkswagen, but it's not here. IHP is the standard measure for reciprocating engines, and SHP is the standard for turbines. And PS isn't even the metric unit for power anymore. Parsecboy (talk) 12:24, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
It is, however, the unit used in Gröner etc. And following the instructions of the convert template for non-SI units commonly used in Germany, the logical solution is to convert Pferdestärken into kW and then into shp, which is what I intended to do in any case. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 12:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
The English translation uses IHP/SHP (and NHP in some of the older ships). Parsecboy (talk) 12:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

If this is all backed up by sources, then fine. But when you make these changes, please don't mark them as minor edits with log entries like "Copyedit (minor)" and "clean up using AWB." Then people like me have to run around trying to figure out what you're up to. I suggest describing what you're doing and why, maybe on your user page or an appropriate project page, and leaving a link in the edit summary.

As for the units, I don't think PS is all that useful. If that's what is given in the source, it should be used as the input to the convert template. But I would suppress display of PS in favor of shp and kW. I think the template can do this, but I'm not sure. Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Didn't think it would be such a big deal. Will try to give more thought to what other people might make of it.
  • {{convert|10000|PS|ihp kW|disp=out|0}} should do the trick.
  • Gröner (1982), p.11 gives PSi, PSw, PSe, and PSno for steam engines, turbines, and diesel/electric engines. On page 17, 1 PS is defined as 75 kgm/s (i.e. 735.49875 W) but irritatingly translated as HP (745.699881448 W). In smaller engines this doesn't matter so much, but once you reach MW, there is a significant difference.
ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 13:57, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
It is a big deal. You are making hundreds of what appear to be automated edits and do not notice some problems as I indicated above. Some changes at articles like Brandenburg-class battleship are very hard to check because they alter numbers used in convert—that means errors can escape attention such as this edit which changed the ship's length from 379.58 ft to 115,7 m. Convert strips all commas from input numbers and "115,7" is ten times too big. Parsecboy fixed that, but who is going to check the many other similar changes where the error might not be so noticeable? I think I saw several other articles with similar edits when I looked earlier.
In general, whatever the source says should be the number used in convert—if it said 379.58 ft that is what should be used because others can then readily verify the value. Use |order=flip if needed, although that is a bit tricky for this example if feet/inches is wanted.
Using a value of PS as the input but not showing PS in the result is not directly supported by convert, and unfortunately the workarounds are ugly:
  • {{convert|10000|PS|ihp kW|disp=out|0}} → 9,863 ihp; 7,355 kW
  • {{convert|{{convert|10000|PS|ihp|0|disp=number}}|ihp|kW|abbr=on}} → 9,863 ihp (7,355 kW)
Johnuniq (talk) 01:54, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I am perfectly capable of making my own mistakes, so the AWB has nothing to do with it. And I tend to tidy up afterwards (thanks for pointing out those categories BTW). This is a simply a case of GIGO. Anyway, I am working on a very limited scope here, a couple of thousand articles on German warships, mostly submarines. The measurements of these vessels are metric (Why any source would say "379.58 ft" is beyond me. And what is the point of using decimals on "ft"?), however, a bunch of sources used for the articles have translated (rather than converted) the information into imperial/US measurements.
The underlying problem seems to be that people used to the imperial/US system, are trying to handle metric data and vice versa (e.g. in Germany the comma is used as a separator where a dot is used in the template and the other way round - actually what I accidentally typed was exactly what is in the German source, I just did not make the cultural adaption!).
As to the template, I can live with the second one, as long as we are agreed that they indeed used PS rather than ihp back in the day. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 04:53, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think we can agree that all sources used PS "back in the day." They would have to be examined individually. In the case of an English translation from a WWII German source, you may have to go back to the German to discover what the original units were (as you apparently did with Gröner). That's why I'm uncomfortable with these changes being done automatically on hundreds of articles with no discussion ahead of time. Kendall-K1 (talk) 11:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I may be terrible at coding, but I usually do my homework before I start to alter thousands of articles (cf.Coluumn 9); and when in doubt, I don't. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 11:17, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

False precision in power ratings[edit]

Please stop putting the "0" parameter in your ship power conversions. This amounts to false precision. The convert template automatically chooses the correct precision in these cases. Kendall-K1 (talk) 19:16, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

You need to discuss that with User:Johnuniq (see above), as the template was provided by him. However, I don't see what else could be done to avoid significant rounding errors. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 02:49, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Your name is on the edits, not John's.
I can think of two ways to avoid the rounding error. One would be to use the first form suggested by John, but drop the "0":
  • {{convert|10000|PS|ihp kW|disp=out}} → 9,900 ihp; 7,400 kW
Another would be to forget about suppressing the PS output, which I guess I could go along with. I don't see any way to avoid both false precision and rounding errors using John's second form. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
My original solution was to convert PS or metric hp into kW and then convert that figure into hp. We can adjust the rounding to whatever level we feel appropriate. The problem here is that the original figure from the sources is not "on record" to be verified. Thus we need the original rating in "PS" for any conversion in order to avoid compromising the data. A nice round figure in PS, however, doesn't mean we get nice round figures for either kW nor hp. It wouldn't matter in a Volkswagen, but it does in a battleship. In your proposal we can only adjust the outcome of the latter unit by any degree, whereas the former will be overly precise.
So my second solution was to use PS and convert it to both, hp and kW at the same time. This however prompted the reaction that outside Germany PS aren't used for information marine propulsion. Which is true. Although many standard reference books on naval vessels, e.g. Conway. simply translate PS as hp or tonnes as tons. The difference is insignificant as such, but then there is no need for a convert template.
The problem you're describing is one of the intrinsic logic of the template itself. A true conversion of the PS figure will almost never result in a nice round hp figure thus the displayed values are overly precise.
In your suggested solution, the rounding leads to two very different values. In fact, the template is suggesting that 37 indicated horsepower (28 kW) are the same as 45 kilowatts (60 ihp). That difference would matter even in a Volkswagen.
ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 18:57, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't see what you mean. Can you provide the template source code that illustrates the 28==45 problem? Kendall-K1 (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes please—also, an example of the "false precision" problem mentioned above would be good. Johnuniq (talk) 00:43, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Your example of converting 10000 PS to "9,863 ihp; 7,355 kW" exhibits false precision. This would normally be converted to "9,900 ihp; 7,400 kW" if you leave off the "0" parameter. Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm, that needs something like |adj=ri0 but with negative precision. I've put it on my list to look at but some major syntax enhancement might be needed and I guess convert won't be able to help with the current issue soon. Johnuniq (talk) 05:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with accurate figures. They may look awkward, but they are correct. False precision is what we get now, when PS is simply translated as hp which is then converted in kW: 10,000 ihp (10,000 PS; 7,500 kW). ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 08:10, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll try not to post here for a while unless asked as I don't have anything useful to say. However, it occurred to me that the sigfig option might sometimes be useful, for example:
  • {{convert|{{convert|10000|PS|ihp|sigfig=2|disp=number}}|ihp|kW|abbr=on}} → 9,900 ihp (7,400 kW)
  • {{convert|{{convert|10000|PS|ihp|sigfig=3|disp=number}}|ihp|kW|abbr=on}} → 9,860 ihp (7,350 kW)
Johnuniq (talk) 11:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
That doesn't work, because it results in rounding error. In general you can't do further calculation on a rounded number, you must only round at the end for display. Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:39, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
"10,000 ihp (10,000 PS; 7,500 kW)" isn't false precision, it's just wrong. Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:41, 23 June 2015 (UTC)