Talk:Capacitor (component)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

earlier discussions moved to talk:capacitor (component)/archive#1

Contents 1 Ultracapacitors 2 Split please 3 ELCO 4 Preferred values 5 Why is polarisation considered an advantage?

[edit] Ultracapacitors

There is no justification for defining ultracapacitors as being different from supercapacitors, the terms are use intechangably in the literature. As this now appears to make a distintion between then I suggest that the passage be removed. However if someone has objectios to that please comment here, and we will sort this out. DV8 2XL 02:49, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

In that case, merge the two paras together explaining the similarity of the 2 terms.--Light current 15:17, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Split please

Since the previous discussion appears to be prematurely archived, I will restart it (again).

This article needs to be split back up into separate articles about each different type of capacitor. The rest of the information should be moved back to the capacitor article. This article title can then redirect back to capacitor.

Creating giant articles that conglomerate anything vaguely related to the title is not Wikipedia style. — Omegatron 21:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I dont have objections to splitting in principle as long as all different capacitor types can be easily reached from this page in the first instance. How many pages are you thinking of splitting it into? After any splitting, we can see what we have left here and decide what to do with the remains at that time. No need for haste!

BTW I dont really agree that this page is too big, but if others think it would benefit from splitting then so be it.--Light current 03:22, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I think things are fine for now. DV8 2XL 03:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

The page is only 33kb and can probably be shortened to 32kb if not 30kb with some careful concision editing. I don't think it needs to be split; all types of capacitors are capacitors, this entire article is still on the same topic.

If this page ever gets too long, then even if pages are created for each type, it's still fair to keep this as a summary page, with main article links and the like.

The template's been there for over a month and nothing seems to have been down about it. It needs to be removed if it is resolved not to split it, at least for now.

(I know I'm not a regular editor of this article and because I don't know much about capacitors I won't contribute, but I'm happy to copyedit it to fully merge it properly, if necessary.) Neonumbers 10:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

all types of capacitors are capacitors

Yet you want to keep capacitor and capacitor (component) separate? — Omegatron 02:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I never said that. I told you I'm not a regular editor of this page. Here was me thinking capacitor was a disambiguation page... how did I ever get here? I could swear, I found this page through playing around with disambiguation pages... hmm... I've confused myself... I was wondering where the overall discussion on its working were, too; it must've been a really late night... but that post was at 11:39pm local time! (shakes head vigourously to regain orientation)

Anyway, this is what I think:

This page should be split if, and only if, there is more to write on each capacitor type. I don't know whether there is or not, I really don't.

If you are confident that more will be written, then by all means, go ahead. To be honest, I don't think anyone will revert it, and no-one seems to have strong objections, rather, just satisfaction with the status quo.

If it is resolved not to split the page, the notice must be removed. That's meant to be a temporary notice. Neonumbers 04:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ELCO

ELCO redirects here, but is not mentioned in the text. Could someone add it in the appropriate place? Is it an electrolytic capacitator? Piet 10:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Preferred values

The article includes a section about E3, E6, E12 preferred values, and this duplicates information in a separate article called Preferred number (also redirected from Preferred values). It seems to me some of the text under Capacitors (component) could be removed. I have put a link to the Preferred number article, but I leave it to someone else to decide how much to take out. It is worth leaving in some of the historic discussion I think, and also the discussion of the wide tolerance of some capacitor types which is why the E3 or E6 values are used.Sangwine 19:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why is polarisation considered an advantage?

I have always experienced it as a nuisance, but in the table of types, it is listed as an advantage of electrolytic capacitors. - douglas bagnall

Changed table hdg to Features instead of Advantages.--Light current 15:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)