Wikipedia:Peer review/Electrical engineering/archive1
What is this page actually intended to be about? Engineers, engineering, education of engineers, history of elcrtricity etc?. Until someone agrees on this it will remain a complete oversize mess mish mash as it is now--Light current 02:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
One key thing is this article is missing references. Other than references, I'm looking to see what else can be done with this article. Cburnett 07:57, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
- It could be deleted! and redirected to a better one--Light current 02:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- Certainly also needs a history and development (Tesla, Maxwell, Farady, Gauss; Benjamin Franklin's kite experiments) as well as a brief overview of various notable contributions (ties into history & development). Cburnett 08:35, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
- I have to disagree somewhat. I don't think this page needs a history on the discovery of the properties of electricity. That's already covered on the electricity page. — RJH 18:50, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Good point, but surely there's room for a history of the profession or, in other words, the history of the engineering of electricity. A lot of the people in the Electricity#History section were, for the lack of a better word, tinkerers of electricity: experimenting with electricity for its own sake instead of harnessing it for practical usage (aka engineering). I guess maybe a survey is a more apt name instead. Stuff like Wardenclyffe Tower. I guess I don't know enough about my own profession to write this section though. :) Cburnett 20:16, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
- I have a few relevant books that discuss the history of electrical engineering as a discipline, as opposed to the inventors and discoverers. Now I have another thing to do on my list...here's hoping its a rainy weekend. --Wtshymanski 22:33, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
- I have to disagree somewhat. I don't think this page needs a history on the discovery of the properties of electricity. That's already covered on the electricity page. — RJH 18:50, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- You say in the lead that the field "encompasses many subfields" – some of those ought to be mentioned in the lead. I agree that a history of the profession is essential. Electronics engineering redirects to Electrical engineering, so perhaps better explanation of those terms would be necessary. Similarly, instead of/in addition to talking about which universities combine the discipline with other related disciplines, perhaps more information could be given regarding the traditional distinctions between the fields, and why those universities chose to combine them. More info is needed on broadcast engineering, and short paragraphs throughout the article should probably be further developed (see paragraphs in the sections "Instrumentation engineering", "Digital signal processing", and "Control systems" especially). --Spangineer ∞ 18:45, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)