Talk:Radio propagation model

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Spam?

Is the link to ATDI.com a spam link?

Question

Hi, NS2 has three radio propagation models implemented namely, “Two-Ray Ground Model”, “Free Space Model” and “Shadowing Model”. There description and related reference could be found from manual chapter. Can someone also mentioned them in the article? --- A. L. M. 10:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please: Read the style manual

These radio propagation model articles extensively defy Wikipedia:Manual of Style. I just looked at Longley–Rice model. The title phrase was not properly bolded and words were capitalized merely because they were in section headings. Under Wikipedia conventions, How this model works is the right style in headings and How This Model Works is wrong. In that article, "Longley–Rice" was written as "Longley–rice" with a lower-case initial "r" (really!), even while all those extra capitals were in headings. I've fixed all the links to Longley–Rice model after moving the article to make the "m" lower-case (and also to change the hyphen in the title to an ndash). I think I broke links in this present article by changing "m" to lower case. Those should get fixed by moving the articles.

There are practical reasons why Wikipedia (like all publishers) has conventions. Michael Hardy (talk) 13:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Organization

I'd like to organize this page in a way that reflects the frequencies for which different models are appropriate. I added a 2.4GHz ISM band model under a bullet for "Band-specific models," but I find this unsatisfactory. Pretty much all the models are appropriate for some bands but not others. Any suggestions? KLuwak (talk) 14:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Full Disclosure

One of the directionality models I cite (EDAM) is my own research. Yes, I am self-pimping. KLuwak (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's honest! I.m.h.o., the important thing is that you also cite contributions by others related to the same issue, so you don't give your own work undue weight. Do you think that is done now? I see you have cited two other papers.

Your conference paper is only cited by two other conference publications, both written by yourself. This mean that your suggested model does not deserve its own Wikipedia article. But probably it can be mentioned shortly in this article. Time will tell. Mange01 (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]