Timeline for Where should I NOT use a GFCI or AFCI?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:07 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Sep 27, 2015 at 21:31 | history | edited | Mazura | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1999 characters in body
|
| Sep 26, 2015 at 3:02 | comment | added | Tester101 | You'll also note that the 2008 version of NEC didn't require GFCI protection in as many places (there were a lot of exceptions). | |
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:58 | comment | added | Tester101 | In 2011 I wasn't as knowledgeable about the NEC as I am now, and I've learned quite a bit since then. If you looked at the edit, you'd see that I simply fixed a typo. In the early days of the site (and even still today), we all trusted Shirlock, as he was the only one actually working in the field. | |
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:49 | comment | added | Mazura | @Tester101 - I'd like to think I can trust an answer with 11 up-votes to an electrical question that doesn't have a community warning on it. BTW, that's one less vote then your un-accepted answer (which probably should be the one). I'd be put-out to find that answer above yours someday, without said warning. Also, you edited it, so what gives? | |
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:36 | comment | added | Tester101 | It's still there because nobody has time to reread all the answers on the site. Besides, you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet. | |
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:32 | review | Low quality posts | |||
| Sep 27, 2015 at 21:35 | |||||
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:30 | comment | added | Mazura | @Tester101 - Then why is it still there? ; flagged... | |
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:29 | history | edited | Mazura | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 598 characters in body
|
| Sep 26, 2015 at 2:22 | comment | added | Tester101 | Check the date on that post, that information is outdated (and was not accurate even at the time). | |
| Sep 26, 2015 at 1:44 | history | answered | Mazura | CC BY-SA 3.0 |