This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Glossaries (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glossaries, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.GlossariesWikipedia:WikiProject GlossariesTemplate:WikiProject GlossariesGlossaries Electrical engineering Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering 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.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Electronics Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I want to thank Wtshymanski and DocFergus for making this one of the best glossaries on Wikipedia. If you two have the time and inclination, please, please, please, please, please do the same for the Glossary of engineering. You will be helping engineering students all around the world. I have always felt that glossaries are one of the most important features of Wikipedia.--LearnMore (talk) 19:42, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why do we need a 'Glossary of Engineering'? By definition it would just be a combined repetition of the individual discipline glossaries. Would it not make more sense to properly populate the other glossaries and just make the 'Glossary of Engineering' a sign-post to the others. All you need now is a willing mechanical engineer; civil engineer and structural engineer to populate the appropriate glossaries. DocFergus (talk) 13:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because it would include terms common to all kinds of engineering, while the specialized lists wouldn't have to repeatedly define things like "critical path method", or other common concepts. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See below in the thought for enhancement section.--LearnMore (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article addresses entirely United States terminology to the exclusion of all others. The glossary should include terms from English usage elsewhere either (ideally) as separate entries or cross references (and ideally both). DocFergus (talk) 15:08, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT. You know what to do. And we've got the CEC and the IET already. Are there any important English-language electrical and electronics engineering terms that are not in this list? --Wtshymanski (talk) 00:29, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wtshymanski: Yes indeed. But I will wait until you have finished the splendid effort that you are putting into populating the list. Are your more tongue-in-cheek definitions there to see if I am paying attention? DocFergus (talk) 13:42, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many letters to go yet. all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.... --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:00, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1041 entries as of a few minutes ago. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:22, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wtshymanski: I note that LearnMore has thanked both of us for the "one of the best glossaries on Wikipedia". I have to put on record that the majority of the kudos belongs with you as it takes quite some time to put together over one thousand thumbnail descriptions of the terms.

My thinking is that there are extra entries that are required (these can be slipped in as they are identified). I also think that terms in the thumbnail definitions need to be wikilinked to somewhere. My initial thought is that those terms that are in the glossary can be linked to the glossary entry and anyone interested in more detail can click through to the article. The problem is that being relatively new around her, I haven't the remotest idea how to do it. DocFergus (talk) 13:26, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not even sure it's got all the electrical/electronic engineering articles from WP in it. My ancient "Modern Dictionary of Electronics" (Radio Shack 1000th Store Commemorative Edition) has 575 pages with about 20 definitions to a page...and electronics has expanded a lot since 1968.My thinking on the definitions is that any additional linking can be delegated to the article linked in the "term" definition - this avoids the blue plague that affects so many WP pages. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:36, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The glossary format is from the Glossary of biology, which is very nicely formatted. In theory, any editor could create definitions by just using the topic sentence of each article, with maybe a little paraphrasing. In theory. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wtshymanski: @DocFergus: First of all, I want to again thank both of you for raising the bar for glossaries on Wikipedia. You will inspire others to contribute to more of them across all topics. I think glossaries are important because they make complex subjects easier to understand. Sometimes the articles on Wikipedia become too technical for high school and college students. The glossaries help counter that. They also allow students to review an entire subject without having to click on each term. I have been waiting a long long time for contributors like yourselves to work on the engineering glossaries. I also think the Glossary of engineering is important because it is the gateway to the field for many students who need a broad overview of all the subfields. Again, thank you both so very much. You are truly helping change the face of Wikipedia. Readers everywhere are grateful.--LearnMore (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aw shuks! <blushes>. DocFergus (talk) 17:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent glossary. Extremely comprehensive and helpful.

We wanted to learn all these terms in a flashcard format so we built one and made it freely available. Thought it would be helpful for anyone who wanted to learn the content of this glossary in a flashcard format like Anki to also be able to discover that they exist and have access to it from the source.

Was going to suggest it to be added in an external links section like the following but as it is linking to our own site, following the instructions of the Wikipedia guidelines, thought it would be best to leave this in the talk page for other contributors to see if it would be relevant or see if there was a better place/format to put it

• Flashcard version of the Wikipedia Glossary of Electrical and Electronics Engineering in an Anki-readable format

Darigov Research (talk) 19:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]