A fact from Protector lock appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 17 August 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Hi, I've added a one-line mention of this other use of the term. I didn't want to mess up an article that's clearly about Hobbs' lock, but Kromer's unfortunately used the same name, and is also a historically relevant and important lock design, also having a reputation for extreme difficulty in picking. I'm slightly dubious about my references. I've provided a reference to a YouTube video, which is never ideal. In this case it is a presentation by a professional locksmith given at OzSecCon, an Australian lock convention/conference, so I believe it has some main-stream value (I believe the locksmith concerned makes part of his business the opening of old, historical safes where people have lost the keys!). I have also provided a link to another company, whose website shows one of the locks; I hope this isn't inappropriately commercial. Finally, I've linked to a wiki operated by koksa.org, a German lock-picking community site; the page I've linked is a list of Kromer protector patents. I hope this is all appropriate; I thought these were rather dubious references, but mainstream writing about locks tends to be rather specialist and hard to get, by the very nature of the subject. Elemimele ( talk) 05:58, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Note: I am drafting something on Kromer's lock at Draft:Kromer_Protector_lock. Please feel free to join in! Elemimele ( talk) 21:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
My proposed new article on Kromer's lock as above was declined by AfC reviewer User:AngusWOOF with the comments "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Protector lock. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you." and "This can be a section in protector lock for the Kromer design". I have therefore done this. In order to make sense of the situation, I've added one sentence at the top explaining that this is now a hybrid article describing two locks that happen to share a name, and splitting the material into two sections. I have left the wording of the Hobbs section identical to how it was. I think the result makes sense, and have no issues with @AngusWOOF's suggestions, but if anyone else (@ Mike Marchmont:, you were the last active editor...) feels strongly this is the wrong approach, then do say! I've left my draft for the moment, in case the articles need re-splitting. Elemimele ( talk) 17:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
A couple of points:
@ Elemimele: and others, what are your views? Mike Marchmont ( talk) 12:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
A fact from Protector lock appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 17 August 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Hi, I've added a one-line mention of this other use of the term. I didn't want to mess up an article that's clearly about Hobbs' lock, but Kromer's unfortunately used the same name, and is also a historically relevant and important lock design, also having a reputation for extreme difficulty in picking. I'm slightly dubious about my references. I've provided a reference to a YouTube video, which is never ideal. In this case it is a presentation by a professional locksmith given at OzSecCon, an Australian lock convention/conference, so I believe it has some main-stream value (I believe the locksmith concerned makes part of his business the opening of old, historical safes where people have lost the keys!). I have also provided a link to another company, whose website shows one of the locks; I hope this isn't inappropriately commercial. Finally, I've linked to a wiki operated by koksa.org, a German lock-picking community site; the page I've linked is a list of Kromer protector patents. I hope this is all appropriate; I thought these were rather dubious references, but mainstream writing about locks tends to be rather specialist and hard to get, by the very nature of the subject. Elemimele ( talk) 05:58, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Note: I am drafting something on Kromer's lock at Draft:Kromer_Protector_lock. Please feel free to join in! Elemimele ( talk) 21:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
My proposed new article on Kromer's lock as above was declined by AfC reviewer User:AngusWOOF with the comments "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Protector lock. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you." and "This can be a section in protector lock for the Kromer design". I have therefore done this. In order to make sense of the situation, I've added one sentence at the top explaining that this is now a hybrid article describing two locks that happen to share a name, and splitting the material into two sections. I have left the wording of the Hobbs section identical to how it was. I think the result makes sense, and have no issues with @AngusWOOF's suggestions, but if anyone else (@ Mike Marchmont:, you were the last active editor...) feels strongly this is the wrong approach, then do say! I've left my draft for the moment, in case the articles need re-splitting. Elemimele ( talk) 17:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
A couple of points:
@ Elemimele: and others, what are your views? Mike Marchmont ( talk) 12:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)