Talk:Wave soldering
 | Metalworking C‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
External Links
Request for comment
Chapmanc is repeatedly adding links to his company as "Examples of wave soldering pallets" (and appears to be deleting links to his competitors). This is a Conflict of interest and will need to be resolved. It is a valid "Example" however and to keep everyone happy - i propose the layout like this:
Manufacturers of wave solder pallets (example): [link1] [link2] etc - with MULTIPLE companies, not just the one.
Same applys with wave soldering machines - will need to add links to other manufacturers other than Essemtec
There is more discussion at my talk page.
Thanks
--Andy.gock 22:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Wave Solder External links
I updated this link to provide a visual example of a wave solder pallet, rather than just a link to a manufacturer. I do not work FOR Pentagon, but I do work in contract manufacturing and order my pallets FROM them. If this constitutes a conflict of interest I apologize. I thought the pictures on their website provided better examples and made for a more useful link. As there are several pallet providers and no set-in-stone standard, your compromise makes perfect sense.
Jirisundstrum 00:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Wave Solder External Links
I added the bulk of the original section on Fixtures and added the original link to Datum Dynamics website. This was continually being deleted (which annoyed me!) and replaced with the Penatgon link. I assumed (wrongly, apparently) that this was Pentagon playing around. I agree with Andy Gock's suggestion. Please note that I have just added content concerning RoHS and wave pallet mateials, together with a link to an article (yes, that I wrote!) on the issues. It is intended to be informative, but does contain references, towards the end, of one of our products, but it is not meant to be a heavy sell. I trust that there is no objection to this? Thanks
Chapmanc 13:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Material used but not cited?
This article seems to have a lot of textual overlap with [1]. Should this Web site be cited? 165.170.128.65 (talk) 20:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)