- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2005
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2006
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2007
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2008
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2009
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2010
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2011
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2012
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2013
- User talk:Tamfang/Archive 2014
Figure 8 Klein bottle
... curl it to bring the edge to the midline; since there is only one edge, it will meet itself there, passing through the midline.
Now that is an elegant and pithy description!
Now it is asking if one were to do it via a multipxer for Jd and Kd thru Ja and Ka and each gerated by using a multiplexer that is a 8 to 1 line multiplexer for each J and K controll. it says to write down the 8 input lines of each multiplxer, including alternatives. It says the least significant address lines is the ones and is connected to Qa and the most significant the fours, adress line is for each multiplexer is Qc. It states that Qb is connected to the twos adress lines in each case. please helpDoorknob747 (talk) 16:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
a user who may need a friend
hello Tamfang this is Dfrr. there is a user named User:Trimethylxanthine who has not been getting any messages from any users but me. in fact only one other user has sent him a message which was when he first came to wikipedia. User:Conifer User:MrWooHoo User:Davejohnsan User:StuRat and many other users have gotten a message kind like this (not exactly like this) to there talk page. so lets send him wikiloves barnstars messages and anything to make him feel that people know about him thank you and have a happy April Dfrr (talk) 09:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Dennis Bratland. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Rice burner because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that you reverted my edition, making again Talk:Twin cities a redirect to Talk:Minneapolis–Saint Paul; but, if Twin cities and Minneapolis–Saint Paul are distinct articles, I think that they should have distinct talk pages (instead of the talk page of one redirecting to the talk page of the other)--MiguelMadeira (talk) 10:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry. When someone with a red name blanks a page, my instinct is to revert! —Tamfang (talk) 19:53, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your efforts to remove "a term used to describe" generally.
Overdrive is tricky though and the article has a long history of a difficult effort to give it a clear lead. The trouble is that "overdrive" has four meanings, all mixed up, and two (maybe three) of these are concepts rather than mechanisms.
It's hard to understand what an overdrive (mechanism) is without first understanding the concept #1 of it, and avoiding the trap of just stating "An overdrive (mechanism #3) is a gadget for making it do overdrive (concept #2)". That's a common definition that's widely given, but it's either inexplicable or actually misleading. We still need to start with concept #1.
If you can assist with any better clarification in the lead, I'm only too aware that it could use it. However I think we are legitimately stuck with "overdrive is a term" for this one, as that's the highest common factor between them. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)