Ron Youvan wrote:
>> It is like the Wikipedia article on the Yagi-Uda antenna. Clearly
>> written by people that know next to nothing about them.
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yagi_antenna
>
> OK, Wikipedia articles are generally not an in depth study of subjects.
> I just read that, am a broadcast engineer and a HAM since 1973, I
> learned they were trying to transfer power (like Tesla I suppose) but I
> didn't notice anything wrong that I could find, what did I miss?
It was a lot worst - I have cleaned it up a bit myself. But there are diagrams
showing the spacing as being 0.1 lambda, then the text says 0.25 lambda.
Nothing
about physical length being less than electrical length. An earlier revision,
the author clearly thought the directors got shorter to work at higher and
higher frequencies - confusing log periodic to Yagi Uda antenna. Most of the
references are to dubious web sites - what-is-what.com, hamshack.com or similar.
This was the last version before I had a go at cleaning it up a bit
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yagi_antenna&oldid=317699541
The one edit after that from 213.78.42.15 is from me (that's my fixed IP, but
for some reason I forgot to log in). You can probably guess I'm 'drkirkby' on
there.
You can see the rest of my comments in the talk page, under the section
"Article
is far too amateurish"
Personally, I thought it was *well* below the average standard of Wikipedia
articles. Of course some are worst, but I thought it was one of the worst.
Others obviously disagree.
Personally, I feel I would not wish to edit Wikipedia articles about things I
feel I have limited knowledge. If everyone did that, Wikipedia might be less
complete, but it would be a lot more useful in my opinion.
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|