User talk:AHMartin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Belated welcome

Welcome!

Hello, AHMartin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  MrZaiustalk 13:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Germinoma

Hi! While you were editing germinoma, did you see anything that needs a clearer explanation? If yes, please leave a note on Talk:germinoma or go ahead and edit the article. Thanks! --Una Smith (talk) 21:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Teleprinter

I was going to undo your revision to Teletype machines where you said "Teletype machines - Copyedit: configuration letters are prefixes, not suffixes)"". But, I first wanted to check to see if there is something that I am missing.

I've always seen Teletype machines listed as machine number followed by configuration letters. For example M28ASR for a Teletype Model 28 Automatic Send and Receive. Or, M28RO for a Teletype Model 28 Receive Only where the ASR and RO are the configuration letters.

Have you seen instances where Teletype machines are listed as ASR-M28 and RO-M28 or something similar?

Thanks for your help. Wa3frp (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Howdy, thanks for your calm reaction to my evidently debatable edit.
My rationale for that portion of the edit is that from circa 1974 until yesterday,
I do not recall *ever* seeing a Teletype denoted in number-config format.
I think the exception was while scanning the
Model 32/33 Tech Manual
(certainly a primary source if there ever was one), although I could be mistaken.
However, my experience with config-number nomenclature as a timesharing end-user is corroborated
by the majority of the web pages indexed by Google world wide:
Teletype model nomenclature
Model Mod-Config Config-Mod
M32RO 7 6
M32KSR 5 21
M32ASR 28 53
M33RO 11 7
M33KSR 68 1170
M33ASR 1060 16900
It seems that the more popular the model, the less likely that colloquial references followed
Teletype's internal naming convention. Indeed, look at the very title of the Wikipedia page
regarding the full-featured model 33: ASR-33 Teletype.
I am reminded of the first IRBM; some cognoscenti may refer to it as the "A-4",
but the most common name by far is "V-2".
Nevertheless, if two competing naming schemes were in fact used, then it's inappropriate
for the article to imply that either scheme was the only one employed.
Given your evident understanding of Teletype internals and manufacturer nomenclature,
could you characterize the distinct naming schemes, and replace the bald-faced
assertion I edited with an integrated description of the two schemes?
73's/AHM/THX (W1AHM)
AHMartin (talk) 22:56, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


I’m sorry for my delay in responding. Since we come from slightly different backgrounds, while sharing a common hobby in Amateur Radio, we naturally have a different perspective about this particular issue. I’ve worked with Teletype equipment since 1967 when I got involved in RTTY on the ham bands.
I’ve gone back to my Teletype manuals, engineering drawings, product notes and marketing material. Teletype always used a number-configuration format. In looking at the Model 33 Teletype documentation, I was only able to find Model 33 ASR, Model 33 KSR, etc. If we look to the Teletype Corporation as the sole source of information about these teleprinters, I can’t find a single situation where the configuration-number nomenclature is used.
On the other hand, you point out the fact the colloquial usage that is defined by a Google search.
I have a suggestion. Tell me if you agree. Can you modify the Teleprinter article to read:
“…Teletype machines were given a model number and often letters indicating the configuration…”
Hopefully that resolves the issue.
73 Russ Wa3frp (talk) 20:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I regret that I put you through so much research. (Hopefully as an aficionado, you found at least some pleasure in it). I decided to render the offending sentence agnostic with the phrase "modified by", and to take advantage of your research by giving an example for the two competing naming schemes. (Given your exhaustive search, there is no point in hiding the results in an author's talk page when it can be put in the article itself).
Offhand, the resulting prose seems to flow nicely enough; but feel free to make any grammatical tweaks. 73's/AHM/THX (W1AHM)
AHMartin (talk) 02:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
One last tweak that I hope that you will appreciate. I've modified the sentence to indicate that some but not all customers placed the configuration letters before the Teletype model number. Wa3frp (talk) 13:24, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thanks; I had intended "tended" to denote the substantial inversion of convention. 73's/AHM/THX (W1AHM)
AHMartin (talk) 18:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle off Samar

Good work on your recent "coyedit." While correcting the typo in the article, did you make a typo in your edit summary? Or were you just being coy? ;-) Maybe there's a law of conservation of typographical errers -- fix one, and another pops up. (I got a chuckle out of it, and I hope you do, too.) Lou Sander (talk) 14:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC) W3BOA, and VERY inactive.

Howdy. Ah, that's an inadvertent pun all right. (I certainly hope the edit itself causes no controversy; I've verified that "off" is the majority phrasing by a large margin). 73's.
--AHMartin (talk) 15:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC) (W1AHM; ex-PDP-10 (and VMS/Unix) layered product software engineer)