Wikipedia:Peer review/Vision mixer/archive1
Vision mixer[edit]
I wrote this article some time ago, and think it's okay (clearly not FA material, though, it's pretty short but I can't think of more stuff to add). Very few people seem to have stopped by to edit it since then however, and I would like to see some comments on whether the topic is handled in an understandable way and if the article can be called comprehensive. Thanks for your input in advantage! -- grm_wnr Esc 23:57, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- It'd be helpful if some of the terminology/buzz words were linked to an explanatory page so that somebody coming in cold with no knowledge of the subject could make sense of it. For example: 'hard cuts', 'dissolves', and 'pattern wipes'. — RJH 15:53, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I linked some more terms to existing pages. But I already tried to explain the jargon in the normal flow of the article, because the topic of video editing techniques is somewhat lacking on Wikipedia, most of the terms simply are disambiguation pages with as much or less info as this article or would be redlinks. Maybe I should add a "glossary" section? You mean we could really need a Glossary of film and video terms page? That seems useful, but not the standard way to do it. Or is it? -- grm_wnr Esc 19:44, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- There's already a video editing dmg page and a list of video topics. So one of those would probably cover the terminology at some point, I think. — RJH 20:59, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I linked some more terms to existing pages. But I already tried to explain the jargon in the normal flow of the article, because the topic of video editing techniques is somewhat lacking on Wikipedia, most of the terms simply are disambiguation pages with as much or less info as this article or would be redlinks. Maybe I should add a "glossary" section? You mean we could really need a Glossary of film and video terms page? That seems useful, but not the standard way to do it. Or is it? -- grm_wnr Esc 19:44, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The term “Vision Mixer” is uniquely European. In the United States it is almost universally called a “video switcher”. While I see that the American term is referenced I believe that most professionals in the US would be stumped if you asked them about their “vision mixer”. I realize that Wikipedia is an international effort, and rather than change the title of the article perhaps you could put a reference something like: “… A vision mixer (also called video switcher or production switcher in the United States ) is a device…”. BTW I am a video editor and have worked in broadcasting for over 20 years. Since the article caught my attention I did make a few changes to the introductory paragraphs, just for clarity.