Talk:Braking chopper

Braking chopper was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 10, 2012	Good article nominee	Not listed

Electronics Mid‑importance

	Electronics portal 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. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... I'm not very familiar with the field but.... The term "braking chopper" appears (with some quick googling) to be used to refer generically to an integrated unit that redirects the braking energy to a resistor. (Dynamic_braking#Rheostatic_braking)

If the object is a brand name, Then it should be merged into the dynamic braking article (braking chopper is quite well written.) with a redirect as and mention in of the brand name in the article as the term seems notable. Staticd (talk) 10:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a brand name. Familiarity with the field is a very useful attribute for an encyclopedia contributor. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for praising the article , it took some time to have the format done , but am little bit unhappy regarding resource reference deletion !! Shrikanthv (talk) 08:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flux braking

How does flux braking relate to braking choppers? From the article there doesn't seem to be any direct connection. Joja lozzo 16:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also mention the source if you're gonna copy the lot. https://library.e.abb.com/public/6866afe6c69df93dc1257888004521e1/ABB_Technical_guide_No_8_REVB.pdf 92.111.167.155 (talk) 10:08, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Braking chopper/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Aircorn (talk · contribs) 13:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Lead is too short. The lists should be converted to prose. It is best not to have a benefits and drawback sections, they should be mentioned in other sections. The applications is too much like an instruction manual.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
This article needs more inline citations. All the lists are uncited and the last section has no cites.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The article is very short. No history of development. Flux breaking's relationship to Braking Chopper is not made clear in the article.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
A "benefits" and "drawbacks" section (especially in list form) can lend undue weight and present things out of context.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Captions could be a bit more descriptive
Overall: Sorry. Too much work needs to be done to get this to GA standard.
Pass/Fail:

Proposed merge with Chopper (electronics)

Both the articles talk about same topic ! Shrikanthv (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose There's overlap, but they're not the same. "Chopper" is a principle. "Braking chopper" is one application, and only one application, of that principle. Choppers (in general) are used for power electronics, with inverters and power supplies etc. that are distinct from the braking use in motors. There are also low-power choppers for instrumentation purposes.

I'd suggest merging most of the content, but still keeping two distinct articles and making the overall Chopper article closer to an overview and disambiguation. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As Dingley said, they're not the same. Consider the chopper principle used in op amps to correct for Vos and Vos drift. This is completely different from a braking chopper. If anything, Braking Chopper should be merged into the Chopper article. If we start separating applications of choppers from the chopper page, we could eventually have dozens of application stubs. Salazar126 (talk) 01:45, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]