Talk:The Mosquito/Archive 2

External links - another suggestion

After a quick trawl of the Compound Securities website, I found this downloads page, which contains a collection of tests and reports produced by third parties. As it provides technical information about the product itself in a more neutral format without any claims or spiel, would you gentlemen say that this satisfies Wikipedia guidelines? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 11:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

This is fine, but I'm still unsure why we're being delicate about avoiding "claims or spiel" from the official manufacturer, when an article like iPhone links to a site that brazenly tries to sell the reader an iPhone. --McGeddon (talk) 11:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm just trying to end this dispute by finding a spot of common ground, that's all As for the iPhone, it certainly does have a button to buy an iPhone plastered on each and every page, but its article also has a link to the technical data page in the same vein as I'm suggesting here. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 12:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and added the link. Bettia ^{it's a puppet!} 10:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

To add my two penn'orth, I think that link is fine. It's not exactly plastered at the top of the page as an ad banner, after all. SimonTrew (talk) 11:38, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a reasonable enough resolution to this dispute - thank you for your help Bettia (bring on the trumpets!)--Purpleblue1 (talk) 02:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I just took a look at the first link, which says it's an MP3 of a 17.4 kHz tone. The peak frequency is actually only 15011 Hz. It may be worth actually having a 17.4 kHz sound linked. 71.98.109.68 (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Curious

Is hearing loss with age a British specialty? I'm 41 and still hear well into 22 kHz - in the mornings... hearing does worsen with time of day - fatigue, driving, telephone etc. - but even then 16 kHz is clearly audible. 90 dB in broad daylight? no thanks... NVO (talk) 18:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Well no doubt hearing range does vary from person to person, I can't see why the British would be particularly sensitive. I can always hear a television (old CRT kind) on in the next room, I mean even if it is on Standby or Mute, as something inside it vibrates, presumably, at I think 31 kHz. (The horizontal scan I thin I would have to look up the exact figures and it varies NTSC/PAL but you get the gist). I am 36 and have always been able to-- one reason I never use standby but switch the power off.

As mentioned above, It's probably more that the British put up with more infringements on their freedom than other countries thus the market exists here more than elsewhere. I feel regardless of age if it is audible to ANYONE beyond the private property, it is quite frankly a common law nuisance. I suppose the defence/defense would be that other things like trains or traffic are equally loud, but they are not emitted constantly. Supposedly there is a form of torture where you just play the same song over and over. The song itself may not be objectionable but it drives you nuts. I see an analogy here. SimonTrew (talk) 17:51, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Sidebar: The TV's CRT whine is primarily in the mid-15k region; I doubt 31k is going to bother folks as much as 15-and-a-half.

Hearing range varies widely among individuals in a population. Upper frequency limit reduction due to age isn't universal for all persons. Binksternet (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

dB means nothing

The Decibel is a unitless logarithmic expression of ratio. The article makes frequent references to Sound pressure levels in dB. Some dB figures, however, are given without reference to a particular comparison standard. May I suggest that occurrences of "dB" be replaced with "dB SPL", where this is the relevant metric, or "dBA" etc. if otherwise. Feldhaus (talk) 20:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Binksternet (talk) 05:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree too. I find it awful be told something is 70 decibels. Well how loud that is depends on how far I am away then, doesn't it. SimonTrew (talk) 09:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Criticism of Opposition?

"Both Albert Aynsley-Green and Shami Chakrabarti have been criticised for opposing the Mosquito."

Why is this even in the article? Just about anyone opposing anything has a counter-critic somewhere; is Wikipedia going to start including all of them? How about criticism of the criticism of the opposition? I suggest this is just removed. If this is to be left in, it should at least be clarified what Hitchen's counter-criticism was, though that may be a bit difficult. He seems to be suggesting that a) the UK is a war zone between 'youth' and authority (adults, good manners?) [it isn't], b) the police never do anything where there are local problems [not true, in my experience], and therefore c) we should be able to fight back with the weapons at our disposal i.e. the Mosquito. Though from his article it seems he would prefer either that the Mosquito caused pain not just discomfort (some reports say that it already does) or, alternatively, that we be allowed to use water cannons. His criticism is not exactly coming from any sort of reasoned position - logically, ethically or legally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.102.185 (talk) 11:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, it's not as if Hitchens is directly accusing Chakrabarti of some misrepresentation or conflict of interest or anything, he's just saying that he disagrees with her about the Mosquito. It might be worth mentioning the Mail's stance (it seems like the sort of thing they'd write about a lot) in the "Support of the Mosquito" section, though. --McGeddon (talk) 11:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Where isthe sound?

We need a sample of the sound in the page (playable in browsers that support it). But make sure both the encoding/compression and the common browser player won't cripple the audio, i've seen several sites pretending to play the sound, but in reality, either due to the way the sound was saved or because the player used messed things up, was playing quite a different frequency than what is was supposed to be. --TiagoTiago (talk) 04:41, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Weapon or not?

I have removed a statement saying that The Mosquito is in fact a sonic weapon. While it is true that some people say this, other expert sources do not. We cannot state as a fact any expert opinion which is in conflict with other expert opinion, we can only give both opinions and cite who believes what. This is already in the article, with human rights groups such as Liberty making the assertion that the device is a weapon. Binksternet (talk) 23:28, 20 November 2010 (UTC)