Talk:Electronic test equipment

Wiggy

I ve never heard of a wiggy til now but it sounds like a piece of electricans gear not part of an engineers toolkit. I think it doesnt really fit here. Should we remove it Atlant and put it under electrical test gear?

I have an interesting(?) story tho'. At my last job the electrical foreman used to be nicknamed 'Wiggy'. But this might have only been because he wore a wig. Coincidence?--Light current 00:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

All of the electricians where I work carry one of these, the units are as tough as nails and can soak up an incredible amount of abuse. I have seen them used by higher ranking techs and engineers who work in industrial power distribution and control settings. --DV8 2XL 01:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but is it a piece of Electronic test equipment?--Light current 01:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely, definitely NOT. It's a solenoid on a spring. Good for telling the difference between a 480 and 600 volt supply and not much more. --DV8 2XL 01:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

OK: is it a piece of electrical test equipment--Light current 01:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

While we're at it - what's Clamp meter, test light and continuity tester doing on the list?

Persactly!--Light current 02:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

What's "electronics"? What's "electrics"? When I test the hundreds-of-pounds power conditioner that is part of my very-definitely electronic project, am I allowed to use a Wiggy on the massive, three-phase power transformer (which has primary taps from 208 volts to at least 480 volts) or do I have to use my 6-1/2 digit Agilent DVM? Seriously, this seems like quibbling over very little -- please leave solenoid voltmeters (e.g., the Wiggy) on this list.

Atlant 14:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Pictures and Layout

The layout of this article is really ugly. IS this a limitation of the way WikiPedia renders pictures, or is it something that can be fixed by editing the article?--Mikeblas 13:06, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

You could try reducing the size of the pics 8-)--Light current 13:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't do that for an article if you don't like thumbnail size. Change the default thumbnail size in your preferences instead. Special:Preferences — Omegatron 14:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the size of the pictures has anything to do with it. The problem is that some are on the left, which causes the text to snake around them. It's offensively bad. -- Mikeblas 14:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not move them all to the right if you prefer? 8-)--Light current 14:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Because I don't understand if the problem is in the way that Wikipedia renders the content with the pictures, or if it is something that can be fixed by editing the article (for example, to have all the pictures on the right). Sure enough, if I move everything to the right, then there are giant gaps in the text. (At this point, Light current, I'm wondering if you read and understood my original question, and if you tried your own advice before proposing it.) --Mikeblas 14:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

No I m just making suggestions. Im not saying they'll work to your satisfaction. 8-|--Light current 14:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I see. Is anyone able to provide help? I'd like to make Wikipedia better. This article is an extreme example of the formatting problems I see in articles with many pictures. Is the problem with Wikipedia's rendering itself, or some formatting that can be corrected in the article? -- Mikeblas 14:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Set all the pictures to the right. This seems to work best unless there's an over-riding reason to do it differently.

Atlant 14:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That is better, but it is still very much broken. -- Mikeblas 14:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

THe answer is that there is no simple answer to this problem. User:Omegatron probably knows more about it than most. You could ask him.8-)--Light current 14:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I Want more pictures to show on the different electronic test equipment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.78.75.244 (talk) 23:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Merge discussion can be found at Talk:Automatic test equipment#Proposal for merge to Electronic test equipment. --Abdull (talk) 16:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Merge proposal removed, added significant information distinguishing it from Electronic test equipment--Rbenech (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Test equipment

Why isn't there an article/disambig/redirect for test equipment? There are already articles on Electronic test equipment, Automatic test equipment, and Built-In Test Equipment, so some signposts for navigation would probably help. 70.250.179.129 (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Test equipment

Can someone please create a redirect from test equipment? 70.247.162.84 (talk) 21:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Test equipment would also refer to other kinds of test equipment, such as automotive test equipment. Inspection gauges would be test equipment. Tensile strength, hardness, and other mechanical properties also come to mind. Equipment for non-destructive testing such as finding fatigue failures in aircraft skins. Glrx (talk) 18:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. But right now, if I try to look up "test equipment", I don't get anything useful, and this is a term I hear all the time. 70.247.162.84 (talk) 18:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I created test equipment as a disambiguation page. Glrx (talk) 23:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Beautiful! Thank you. 70.247.162.84 (talk) 15:33, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Header Image

Alternative...(soon to be rotated) Scope with curve tracer, TDR, DVM, counter, old WWVB receiver, and function generator.

If anyone would like to pitch in, we are disputing as to whether https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Oscilloscope2.jpg or https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Test_Equipment_Stack.jpg would be a better image to display at the top of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpdwkouaa (talk • contribs) 20:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose Test_Equipment_Stack.jpg. It is not just which picture belongs on top, it is whether the picture should be used at all. I do not see it adding to the article, and its composition is poor. When I look at the picture, I wonder about how stable the stack is. Glrx (talk) 04:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
• The stack is the better of the two because it shows a variety and is in focus. Neither is great but we can't let great be the enemy of good. ~Kvng (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

How about File:Test Equipment Stack 1.jpg instead? Glrx (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Better than either of the other two. ~Kvng (talk) 23:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

I also support this optionTpdwkouaa (talk) 23:46, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I replaced the Tek 475 with the image on the right. If you want to keep the 475, then reinsert it. Glrx (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Electronic test equipment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.lxiconnexion.com/articles/0708/0708_scripting.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100905170530/http://www.pxisa.org/Member_Roster.html to http://www.pxisa.org/Member_Roster.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090517092309/http://ieee1588.nist.gov/ to http://ieee1588.nist.gov/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 19 September 2017 (UTC)