Over/under cable coiling and User talk:Susvolans: Difference between pages

(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
{{wikify}}
 
Bluemoose (talk | contribs)
 
Line 1:
{{add|Add a new comment here}}
{{wikify}}
'''Over/under cable coiling''' refers to a method of storing cables that preserves the [[capacitance]] and [[common-mode rejection ratio]] built in by the manufacturer with a twist in the cable, and the shielding that encases the twisted pairs within. It also keeps knots to a minimum, allows the cable to lie flat when uncoiled, and makes running the cables easier and faster.
 
== Archives ==
The 'over/under' name refers to the practice of twisting the cable in one direction to make the first coil, and un-twisting it to make the next, and repeating this until all the cable is neatly coiled. Connecting the ends on the outside of the loops, or tying them in that position, insures that the ends don't pass through the loops in storage, so there are no knots when the cable is laid out.
[[User talk:Susvolans/Archive 1|August 2004 to September 2005]]
 
== Thank you ==
Have someone hold a length of cable stretched gently between both of their hands. Grab the center of the cable between your thumb and fore finger and rotate the cable one direction or the other until a loop forms on either side of center. This is a microcosm of what happens as you over/under coil the cable.
 
Thank you for speaking up on the behalf of a user you did not even know. I appreciate your efforts for justice. Should you have any lingering concerns, I encourage you to come to my talk page and join the dialog there on what has occured. Discussion is the best way to calm stormy waters. [[User:TheChief|<font color=#0000ff>The</font><font color=#ff7f00>Chief</font>]] [[User_talk:TheChief|(<font color=#0000ff>Pow</font><font color=#ff7f00>Wow</font>)]] 17:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
The advantages of over/under are many, as discussed above. The cable isn't twisted as its coiled, nor as its laid out, so the twist applied by the manufacturer is maintained, as is the shield. No loops in the cable means no loops on the stage or floor to trip passers-by.
 
==Ignore all rules==
Straight coiling, or the practice of coiling a cable in the same direction, coil after coil, has the same result as coiling cable on a spool. If the cable comes off of the spool the same way it goes on, the 'lay' is preserved, and the cable isn't damaged. If a cable is straight coiled and then pulled from the coil, it has the same effect as coiling cable on a spool and then pulling the cable off the top of the spool, imparting a twist in the cable with every coil that is removed.
First, obviously, if rule 5 were deleted, it would become four pillars rather than five. I think that any change to the four/five pillars should be well discussed on its talk page first. Failure to do so would be to ignore all rules, which could be seen as [[WP:POINT]].
The only advantage of straight coiling cable is that it is easily taught and can be accomplished by untrained assistance.
 
I personally think that the five pillars document is fine, because it says that there are no rules other than those listed, and the writers' rules of engagement are one of the pillars. The real problem is that Ignore All Rules is the wrong summary of the guideline, and is sufficiently wrong as to be a destructive title, because it can easily be read as meaning that one can ignore civility. [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] 18:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
==External links==
 
*[http://members.cox.net/mactop/ Video of over/under technique]
Thanks Susvolans - I'm just taking baby steps for now [[User:Redkaty|Redkaty]] 14:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 
==Final decision==
The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Louis Epstein]] case [[User:Raul654|&rarr;Raul654]] 02:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]] ==
 
Regarding the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&curid=39805&diff=28415528&oldid=28413773 revert; the claim that all five pillars are unchangeable has no foundation in policy], why is it there then? Is the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars]], wrong? -- [[User:Zondor|Zondor]] 17:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== Updated poll ==
I have completely changed the poll. Please see [[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Poll]] --[[User:AllyUnion|AllyUnion]] [[User talk:AllyUnion|(talk)]] 02:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== curly quotes ==
 
May I ask why you moved [["—All You Zombies—"]] to [[“—All You Zombies—”]]? &mdash; [[User:Flamingspinach|flamingspinach]] | [[User_talk:Flamingspinach|(talk)]] 06:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== class="wikitable" ==
 
I wouldn't know how, but why would you want to anyway? [[User:Bluemoose|Martin]] 14:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
:Aha, so you mean find occurances where it was expanded when it used [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Prettytable&oldid=23029079 this] revision of the prettytable. In which case the only way I think you could find them would be to get someone to use an SQL query on the database dump, but I don't know how successful that would be. At the moment I am not capable of doing this, but plently of other people are. [[User:Bluemoose|Martin]] 16:10, 22 November 2005 (UTC)