User talk:Elcap

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

Capacitor Plague, translation from the german version[edit]

Hi, as an german expert of electrolytic capacitors since decades I know a little bit about the background of the case of failing capacitors and wrote it down in the german Wiki. Trying to translate it into the english language I know very well, that my english is "bad". So I would ask for some help from original speaking english people to correct the text you can find under: User:Elcap/Capacitor Plague. Thanks so much --Elcap (talk) 11:29, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I've done a bit - it's not as bad as you may think. Peridon (talk) 13:39, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
You might want to look at Help:Math and Template:Cite web. Really useful pages. mabdul 14:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Peridon, but did you read down to the end? --Elcap (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes - identifiable German in origin lower down, but nowhere near some things I've seen here. Peridon (talk) 15:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
For the images on Commons with embedded German language text, please upload similar ones with no text and with English language text.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 21:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Jeff, yes, in work, wait some days. Greetings --Elcap (talk) 15:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Why are we arsing around here?

Per WP:BOLD I have just copied it over the live article. [1]

It can be edited. It's a wiki. WP:BRD.  Chzz  ►  00:11, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Help request[edit]

check-mark
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

please delete my user page User:Elcap/Capacitor Plague, this draft is already copied over the article Capacitor Plague Thanks so much --Elcap (talk) 15:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I have placed a tag requesting that an administrator delete this user page. In the future, if you want your own user subpage deleted, you may place {{db-user}} at the top of the page. An administrator will be by to delete it; however, since this is usually a low-priority task it may be a few hours before it is actually deleted. —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi KuyaBriBri, thanks for helping, the large number of different deleting tags makes me unable to find the right one. --Elcap (talk) 15:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Request for copyedit[edit]

I have started to copyedit your draft. Are you aware that English Wikipedia already has an article on Dielectric absorption? This means that your userspace article cannot be pasted into mainspace. Rather, it has to be merged by an administrator in order to preserve the edit history. Do you want to use the existing article (or part of it) as a lead section? Your article does not give a very good introduction to explain what the article is all about. SpinningSpark 17:41, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi SpinningSpark, first, thank you so much for editing, you spend a lot of time for my draft. Yes, I know that an Engish article exists in the Wiki and shure, an administrator has to decide, wether the existing one or my new draft or a mixed version shall be published. How can I arrange this? Greetings --Elcap (talk) 09:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
It is not for an administrator to decide what should be in the article - administrators on English Wikipedia have no special powers over content. You need an administrator only to merge the record of the histories of the two articles. Would you like me to do this now? I suggest that the content is initially the added content of both the new and old articles. It will then be up to you and other editors to edit this into a coherent text. SpinningSpark 10:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. Of course, if you can help me to merge the records of the history it would be very nice. You know, that the DA in the English Wiki is explained in two articles, Dielectric absorption and Types of capacitors so someone has to decide how often and what will be explained in which article. In the German Wiki the DA is explained in the main article about capacitors. An article about types of capacitors do not exists in German. --Elcap (talk) 15:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok, it's done and is now in mainspace. I have done no work to check for consistency with the existing text. I leave that to you to edit. SpinningSpark 17:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Hi SpinningSpark, Thanks so much. Do you think, that I can delete the first sentence in the article? Your correction of my very german coloured text seems to me perfect. --Elcap (talk) 17:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Why do you want to delete the first sentence? The opening sentence of an article should succintly define the subject and place the title in bold font if it is a term. The sentence seems to me to be doing just that. Or am I missing something. SpinningSpark 18:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I never saw, that the sentence about the German origin already was deleted --Elcap (talk) 12:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Film capacitor[edit]

Hi Wikis, I wrote a new article "film capacitor" and put it under "User:Elcap/Film capacitor". This article is a translation from the German Wikipedia article (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunststoff-Folienkondensator) with some additional new informations. Somebody say that I am an expert of capacitors but not of the English language, that is the reason to ask for help in grammar, wordings and so on. Editors may wish to consult the parallel German article to clear up any remaining points of confusion, or to import more-recent improvements from there. Editors may also wish to consult the external references or to develop them further. --Elcap (talk) 01:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I do not have time right now to undertake a copyedit so I'm leaving this open but I added attribution for the translation to the references section (and changed their formatting) and placed a filled-out {{Translated page}} template on the talk page. Note that when you think this is ready to "go live"—to appear in the main part of the encyclopedia—please make sure to use the move function (i.e., don't copy and paste it to a new name) and that you move the talk page as well. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
You can also request peer review via Wikipedia:Peer review. Just follow the instructions on there. Biglulu (talk) 07:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Quickly glossing it over, it meets the criteria for inclusion, and doesn't have any immediate red flags. Why not transfer it over now, and work on it from main space, tagging it with {{Cleanup-translation}}? Sure, it needs work, there is quite a bit of copyediting that needs to be done, but nothing that can't be fixed in main space. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK now?[edit]

So, now that you've gone live with the article, do you want me to do the DYK as I offered way back when? Reify-tech's suggestion still seems good: "...that metallized film capacitors have a "self-healing" property which allows them to automatically clear away internal short-circuit faults, and to resume normal operation within fractions of a second?" The nomination must occur within five days of the move to the mainspace. If you or Reify-tech want to do the nomination, I would of course defer to either of you.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm fine with watching you do the nomination this time, if you let me learn how it's done. --Reify-tech (talk) 12:18, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
First, thanks again for helping. And second, yes I agree with a DYK nomination. Reify-tech's suggestion not alone still seems good, it is good. Greetings from the cold summer in northern Germany. --Elcap (talk) 07:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
No problem at all! and it's posted, awaiting review. Reify-tech, I'm not sure how you would follow it, so let me describe what I did:
  1. I first reviewed another DYK hook in the spirit of the quid pro quo requirement, though I'm technically exempt because it's not a self-nomination for me;
  2. I then created Template:Did you know nominations/Film capacitor through the form at Template talk:Did you know#How to post a new nomination; the text you see there was created by filling out a pre-loaded template, with these parameters:
{{subst:NewDYKnomination
 | article         = Film capacitor
 |    article2     = 
 | hook            = ... that metallized '''[[film capacitor]]s''' have a "self-healing" property which allows them to automatically clear away internal [[short-circuit]] faults, and to resume normal operation within fractions of a second?
 | author          = Elcap
 |    author2      = Reify-tech
 | image           = File:Wiki-Folkos-P1090317-1.jpg
 |    caption      = Plastic film capacitors potted in rectangular casings, or dipped in epoxy lacquer coating (red color)
 | comment         = Other images available in article
 | reviewed        = Leydig cell hypoplasia
 }}
3. I then transcluded the nomination by going to the section at Template talk:Did you know for June 4 (note that this is the day of the move to the main space in UTC; not today) and added {{Template:Did you know nominations/Film capacitor}} at the top of the list. Voilà, all done.
The nomination itself is at {{Did you know nominations/Film capacitor}} and it is listed at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on June 4. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for describing the process in more detail, I've never seen it before. I've been out all day, so it will take me a while to digest this. Only question so far: The last line above says "reviewed = Leydig cell hypoplasia" — is this possibly a leftover from a previous template, or is there some connection I'm not understanding? --Reify-tech (talk) 03:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Nope, it is quite intended. I think if you click on and read the two links in the first section of my description of the process (labeled 1.") you'll understand (actually, clicking on the links in reverse order would probably be better for your quick understanding). Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:19, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Guys – the nomination has been rejected. Please see the nomination for why and my response, as well as my post at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Sourcing standards.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Hi Fuhghettaboutit, I did not understand all what you are discuss about DYK and the "Sourcing standards". But I understand, that somebody miss some sources for some informations/arguments. Why do not ask me?? 40 years work experiences with capacitors - may be, for me seems a lot of things as a matter of course. But I surely can add the wanted sources. But what I not can do: Correct English grammar and correct Wikipedia syntax. Please let me know, if I shall add something.
  • By the way, in the german Wiki we don't know something like DYK. We judge an article if it is technical wise correct and complete and than it gets a marking like "readable" (or nothing). "Gruesse" from Germany --Elcap (talk) 17:37, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
By the way, the German Wikipedia has a similar program on a smaller scale, "Schon gewusst?", the rules are less strict. I am willing to help with English, German and Wiki syntax, but am almost unable to read the article, not speaking the technical language ;) - We rescued other articles from "rejected" before, if that helps, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Hallo Gerda, herzlichen Dank für Dein Angebot. Für den vorliegenden Artkel "Film capacitor" ist eine englische Korrektur der Grammatik wohl nicht erforderlich, da hat Reify-tech bereits umfangreiche Korrekturen durchgefürt. Aber eine Frage habe ich, warum gibt es von der englischen "DYK" zur deutschen "Schon gewusst" Seite keine Verlinkung? Da ich nie auf die Startseite schaue, ist mir diese Rubrik nicht aufgefallen. Nochmals vielen Dank und schöne Grüße --Elcap (talk) 11:53, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Elcap, I am the editor who rejected the DYK. It is about having sources for every paragraph. Please look again Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Sourcing standards.. At the bottom of that page, I have asked that someone help you. Articles can be brought up to standard and re-assessed for the DYK process. I hope someone comes forward to help you with this. Good luck. Maile66 (talk) 20:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Ceramic capacitor[edit]

You're welcome. It's a good article.--Debouch (talk) 00:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Capacitor plague[edit]

Hi, Elcap!

You recently reverted my March 10 edit to Capacitor plague and you used the edit summary: (link).

Several points:

  1. If you're going to revert someone's edit, please say so in the edit summary. Don't just describe your edit.
  2. Saying "link" is misleading, because you're not adding a link or improving the display of the link. You're editing the link formatting, and I happen to think in a way that is not beneficial.
  3. I don't believe you're correct here. We're talking about whether to have a <ref> that says
 http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.224026247656331.55639.211317688927187&type=3 Capacitor plague

or that says

 [2] Capacitor plague

It is my assertion that the former is always better. I'd much rather know it is a link to Facebook (sounds awful sketchy!) just by looking at it, rather than having to hover over it or click it to find out. This is not a question about whether Mediawiki recognizes it as a link -- it does in both cases. If there is a proper cite web or whatever, that's best. And if you can provide a name for the link, such as [http://example.com Link to example.com]. But if you can't, and you're just going to have the URL, it should be http://example.com, so people can see what it is, and not [http://example.com] so they can't. Those render as Link to example.com, http://example.com, and [3], respectively.

Thanks! Feel free to disagree and let me know. jhawkinson (talk) 04:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jhawkinson, point 1 and point 2, agreed, inserting "link" is misunderstanding. You deleted the angular brackets and I tried to get to the internet page, it doesn't work. Please see the history of these article, it starts with a big rumor on facebook and other pages. The first two links are the case writing this article, without the this rumor the terrible story behind would be calm and silent drained away and may be dusted in a drawer of Taiwanese development engineer. How do you like to write the link to the both pages, that is up to you, I don't care. For me as one of the authors it is important to have a link to the beginning of the story.
By the way, I am now 70 years old and never had an education in software writing, that is the reason all the templates and instructions are a strange world for me. Regards --Elcap (talk) 09:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Elcap! I totally agree there should be a link. Does the link in the current version of the article work for you? If it doesn't, I'm curious what browser and operating system you're using? It works for me and I think that it should work for everyone, but sometimes things don't work that should. Congratulations on participating in Wikipedia as a septuagenarian! I assumed you were an electrical engineer who liked capacitors (hence El Cap), but maybe not... jhawkinson (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jhawkinson, thanks, both links are working with my browser now. Using the nickname "Elcap" indeed comes from my profession working for and with electrolytic capacitors, not for "caps" for "El capitano". Regards --Elcap (talk) 08:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Brian Evans Conway[edit]

Why did this happen? I've seen this before in other articles. Please either respond on my talk page or leave me a talkback message.JJJ (say hello) 15:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

never know. I only try to correct the disambiguation notice from a bot for 2 links. Regards --Elcap (talk) 16:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Citations of own work?[edit]

After citing the Hillman/Helmold paper, a bunch of work is uncited, photos from "own work."

They're professional enough that I'm guessing they've been published in the literature...somewhere. Can you please add citations?

As the successor to Helmold, still working with Hillman, I'd really like to look at the papers!

Thanks, --failjolesfail (talk) 14:10, 13 May 2013 (EDT)

Hi failjolesfail, thanks for praise my professionality. 35 Years working for and with electrolytic capacitors of a big international electronic company I founded 2002 my own consulting office in Germany. Analysis of failed capacitors, calculation of life time expectation of e-caps under extraordinary conditions and so on. The knowledge about the chemical reactions of the two-step oxidation of aluminum I got during my work for this company. REM and SEM analyses are done by my order from a University (Graz, Austria). One year ago, in an age of 70 I closed my consulting office and now I "only" writing my life experiences in Wiki articles. (Last one: User:Elcap/Supercapacitor). Sorry, I can't deliver any additional literature, it is "my own work". The general problem is, that since 50 years the development of electrolytic capacitors are done in company development departments, not at universities. And the companies keep their informations stricly secret. --Elcap (talk) 07:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
P.S. If you give me a mail adress, I can send you the last science book about Elektrolytkondensatoren (1991), K.H. Thiesbürger (in German) I made a pdf copy. --Elcap (talk) 07:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful article[edit]

Great work on Capacitor plague. I really like the use of pictures as more than ornaments, but to help educate. TCO (talk) 22:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Elcap. You have new messages at Piandcompany's talk page.
Message added 13:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jason Spriggs chat 13:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Karol Pollak[edit]

The name was anglicised, but the person in question is one hundred percent Polish, and, as such, has an entry under his own, non-anglicised name. The articles was machine-translated from Polish, and that was the only reason for 'Charles' instead of 'Karol' in page title.

 13:48, 7 August 2013‎ Quetzalcoatl.pl (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,509 bytes) (+4,509)‎ . . (Translation of Polish wiki article about Karol Pollak) (thank) (Tag: possible cut and paste move or recreation)

It thus logically follows that the article should point to the Karol Pollak, not Charles Pollak page. If you wish to enhance Karol Pollak page and say that 'he was known as Charles Pollak' (with cite), feel free to do so; even then, the person's name *will* stay Karol Pollak due to Wiki guidelines - due to higher priority of national name and low overall impact of anglicisation on the biography of the person itself. The fact that e.g. patent offices of the age anglicised people's names does not change the fact the entry for KP is currently based only on Polish sources.

I'm open to dispute, but I don't see any real point in your revert. It neither enhances nor provides any input into the matter.

Also, next time, before reverting any good faith edits, even those you consider factually invalid, please first propose a Talk topic and see other people's opinions. I do appreciate your input on the capacitor articles, but rember:

 Wikipedia != personalpedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith

Vaxquis (talk) 23:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Vaxquis, where should I have made a revert? Which article?
But you can add on the aticle of Karol Pollak, that he invent January 1896 under the name "Charles Pollak" in Frankfurt, Germany, the first "Elektrischer Flüssigkeitskondensator mit Aluminiumelektroden" (Aluminum electrolytic capacitor) Kaiserliches Patentamt Patentschrift Nr: 92564. --Elcap (talk) 11:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Oh sorry, just see it, your revers at Electrolytic capacitors. Now we have a littl problem. The name on the invention is Charles Pollak. He undersighn with Charles Pollak. So I kindly ask you, wether you can add a remark in your article, that (how much?) some of his inventions are published under "Charles Pollak". You cant change the past, but you can explain it. --Elcap (talk) 11:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Done. quote:
In Berlin, Pollak ran electrotechnical factory "G. Wehr Telegraphen-Bau-Anstalt". Later he returned to Britain to commercialize his patents, which were released under anglicised version of his name, "Charles Pollak"
I suppose all his international patents were for "Charles", so AFAIK this statement is accurate. If somebody has more info on this, it'd be even better. Vaxquis (talk) 13:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten (06) by Ron.jpg

Elcap, Thanks for referencing our paper on capacitor history and for quoting my line on how anything can become complicated given 250 years of evolution.

As you must know, I started editing a series of articles on Capacitor Technology for IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine. I have not been able to find someone to write a paper on electrolytic capacitors. Would you be interested. I would act as editor for the paper, i.e., I would clean up the English, etc. - I am good at that, my father was an English Professor. If you are interested, please get back to me at steven.boggs@ieee.org Best regards, Steven Boggs (and Janet Ho)

Sboggs159 (talk) 21:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Supercapacitor Ragone plot[edit]

Pardon me if I didn't get it. The supercapacitor#Energy density and power density Ragone plot File:Supercapacitors-vs-batteries-chart.png shows the energy density higher than pretty much anything, including batteries, other than fuel cells. The article states: supercapacitors have energy densities that are approximately 10% of conventional batteries. This seems to be contradictory. Am I missing something? (Watchlist full, please {{ping}}) Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

The middle point of the oval to "Hybrid (Li-Ion)" is app. 10 Wh/kg, the point of Li-Ion batteries app. at 100 Wh/kg. That are 10 %. The energy density shown in the dashed oval “New developments” of about 40 to 80 Wh/kg represents the figures coming from research labs. Here the reader has to know, that these figures are the research results of one electrode. The complete capacitor later, if the development comes to a real capacitor, mostly can reach only the half value of one electrode or lesser. This figures in the dashed oval indeed have to be explained a little bit better. Greetings --Elcap (talk) 07:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Just realized the rectangle titled "supercapacitors" is a legend, not the power/energy density of supercaps. I was looking for "Supercap", my eyes were drawn there, and that's all I saw. That's where I was confused. Thanks for your explanation. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 22:25, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Technology Barnstar[edit]

Barnstar-lightbulb3.png The Technology Barnstar
For generously sharing profound knowledge and a lifetime of experience with Capacitor technology, while patiently working in English as a second language. Reify-tech (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


Hi Reify-tech, thanks for the barnstar. I remember our fruitful cooperation for film caps. Do you interested to help me a second time? It's another milestone for a capacitor family, please have a look at User:Elcap/Aluminum electrolytic capacitor --Elcap (talk) 08:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much[edit]

Your work on capacitor-related wikis is very helpful to me, an electrical engineering student, and to the world. I have nothing but praise for you! Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theburn7 (talkcontribs) 12:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Theburn7, thanks for praising. You can help me in bettering my grammar in the new articles Electrolytic capacitors, Aluminum electrolytic capacitors and Tantalum capacitors. --Elcap (talk) 14:43, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Electrolytic capacitor[edit]

I have just had a crack at the History section of your article. There are a couple of bits that I cannot make sense out of. Can you have a look and see if you can put them more clearly. I have marked them either with a comment or a {cn span} citation needed tag. Many thanks, DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at remotelysensed's talk page.

Edit of Supercapacitor Arcticle[edit]

Elcap, you removed an important table entry in the 2015 Feb 08 edit of the Supercapacitor Article (commented only as deleting a double picture). The entry was from the New Developments section:

Quantum nanoclusters of dipolar metal oxides in TiO2 or TAO, 2013, 480 Wh/kg

If you look at the 2015 Jan 27 edit, it has this entry. It's the last entry in the table of the New Developments section, and has 3 citations. Was this an accidental removal? If so please put it back, thanks. DrZygote214 (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the picture from the Paris tram on such a preferred position at the beginning of the article is a little bit displaced. However, sorry for the deleting of the links, I have repaired the links in the pictures description. --Elcap (talk) 13:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
The table entry has not been replaced. I wasn't talking about any links regarding a picture. Look at the 2015 Jan 27 page and search for "480 Wh/kg". That's the missing table entry. DrZygote214 (talk) 21:23, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Next Steps[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at remotelysensed's talk page.

A question[edit]

I was going to add a link to the links section of the film capacitor page, but I found that section is now missing. What happened? Or am I missing something? Your work on capacitors is truly awesome I must add. Thanks for all the great work you have done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.173.60 (talk) 07:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi , I dont understand your question. What is a link section? --Elcap (talk) 14:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
A section with links to external sites. I have seen it called "Weblinks" or "External links" on other pages. There was such a section on Film Capacitors, but I don't see it now. Hmmm I may be thinking of a different capacitor page, there are so many. I think the film page needs such a section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.173.60 (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, may be you saw "Weblinks" on the German site of "Kunststoff-Folienkondensator". However, in the table of the manufacturers you can find the weblinks to the relevant companies, it is the same. --Elcap (talk) 09:17, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Merry stuff.[edit]

Poepkop (talk) 17:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year Elcap![edit]

.

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Polymer capacitor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MLCC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Elcap. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Elastance[edit]

Ha ha ha in your face :-) ! SpinningSpark 11:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC)