Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Computing page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.

Shortcuts: WT:COMP WT:COMPUTER WT:COMPUTING WT:INFOTECH

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

WikiProject Computing

(Rated Project-Class)

Information technology portal

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computing 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.

Project

This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Any sections older than 31 days are automatically moved. Sections with fewer than two timestamps (no replies) are not archived.

[edit] Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 08:59, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Unix merging

The current version is problematic : the recent merge hasn't been finished (eg: Mv, it's enough urgent), and its heterogeneity : the page names are depending of chronology instead of a lexical place (eg: ls instead of ls (Unix) will engendered a conflict if the users would need to add another "ls" definition). Thanks for your support. JackPotte (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The situation of absent article has been now resolved, but the page name debate is still open. JackPotte (talk) 21:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

In the case of a command name like "mv", it makes sense to rename it to "mv (Unix)" or "mv (command)", because there is already a disambiguation page for it, as an abbreviation with multiple meanings. It also makes sense to group all of the Unix command names by a single naming convention. — Loadmaster (talk) 15:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree, with this norm every bot would easily modify only these pages. JackPotte (talk) 00:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Won't "mv (POSIX)" be more encyclopaedic? Stuartyeates (talk) 09:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I would have said it would make sense to group them under one article Unix / Linux commands or something similar not looked at the article but find it hard otbelieve that oen command could justify a entire article in itself--Andy Chat c 11:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Advice sought concerning Alexa traffic rankings in Comparison of wiki farms article

Please see:

Comparison of wiki farms
Talk:Comparison of wiki farms#Removed Alexa column and the related talk sections that follow.
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Spamfighters repeatedly trying to delete longstanding popular chart of wiki farms

--Timeshifter (talk) 19:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Dell mergers/acquisitions FLRC

User:SRE.K.A.L.24 has nominated List of mergers and acquisitions by Dell for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Project Members

If there are no complaints (within a day or so), I will delete all "red-link" members names. -- Mjquin_id (talk) 03:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

So far, of the ones I have checked it looks like nearly all are deleted accounts.

The redlink user accounts that haven't been deleted have not had user contributions in over a year (of the ones I have checked). Maybe those should be kept though? We need all the help we can get.

Many people only use their talk pages, and not their user pages. Busy people shouldn't be discouraged from helping out here when they have time. The most skilled people are oftentimes the most busy, and may not edit often. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I more or less agree with Timeshifter. Some editors choose not to have a user page, even though they regularly contribute (e.g Oceanh). We could probably create a list of inactive members (those who haven't edited in a year), like over here Wikipedia:WikiProject_Films/Participants#Inactive_members, but it would be a lot of work, I suppose. decltype (talk) 15:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm a red link editor although I'm not listed there. Tothwolf (talk) 00:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Dont remove them from participants list but those who havent edited for last atleast 6 months ( or 1 year) or so may be moved to an inactive members section? Who is willing to take up this task ? :) -- Tinu Cherian - 00:22, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It would take alot of work to swithc people to inactive and check if they are, i suggest leaving amessage on there talk asking if they are still active or still takign part in the project--Andy (talk - contrib) 12:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Usefulness of Alexa traffic rankings

How useful are Alexa traffic rankings?

At Talk:Comparison of wiki farms#Advice sought concerning Alexa traffic rankings DreamGuy wrote the following:

Alexa traffic ratings are completely meaningless in the real world. They are easily manipulated, only poll an extremely small and unrepresentative sample of the web-surfing public, and serve no purpose whatsoever other than to give WP:UNDUE weight. They should be removed here and everywhere on Wikipedia. DreamGuy (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I find Alexa rankings useful in a rough way as another factor for choosing between which wiki farm to use. There are many other factors of course; software used, free/paid, staff responsiveness, censorship policy, etc..

I think popularity (as in Alexa traffic rank) of a site is an indicator of longevity. I have found this to be true for other web hosts. It may be true also for wiki farms.

There are no policies or guidelines against including Alexa traffic rankings in an article, list, or chart. There are many Wikipedia pages with Alexa traffic rankings. See the results of this search of Wikipedia articles for Alexa rank.

There is an infobox with Alexa rank as one of the parameters: Template:Infobox Website. That infobox is on many pages.

So what do others think? Please see also: Alexa Internet#Accuracy of ranking by the Alexa Toolbar. Here is my opinion: Any manipulation over the longterm to jack up the rank of a particular site would be difficult to maintain since it would require many multiple installs of the Alexa toolbar on many computers in a coordinated effort that would have to be changing over time to avoid scrutiny by Alexa. Very few websites would have the resources, network of people, and time, to do this successfully longterm, and get away with it unobserved by Alexa. As with all info reported in Wikipedia articles people have to decide for themselves as to the relative merits of Alexa traffic rankings. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Assimilation

"Talk to the potential child WikiProjects about co-ordination, and see what sort of response you get. Be careful not to try to dictate to them; they could be sensitive about you appearing out of nowhere and wanting to assimilate them."

I personally believe dictate may be too harsh of a word to use here, but I do have some minor concerns about how daughter projects (underneath this one) are managed. There seems to be this sort of implied structure, with Computing acting as the rule all parent. My main concern is WikiProject Computer Security; the topic is "very" broad. I believe the project is being treated as a "child task-force" of this project (e.g. our project color scheme, your banner with a switch for the project and article rating, and us using your criteria system; whereas we don't use the major one).

This seems to run the same way for other projects; another example may be WikiProject Software (implying parentage and a hierarchy of projects). Thoughts? Possible resolutions? ^blurred _peace ☮ 19:11, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RfC: Parentage and Implied Structures for Daughter WikiProjects

See my section above this one (that has gone uncommented from participants of the project) for a better view on the situation. I generally want to see independence given to WikiProjects parented by this one, and remove the underlying sense of bureaucracy from all the daughter projects (e.g. WikiProject Software's coordination and hierarchy). I request comments, possible resolutions, and meaningful discussion so we can come to some sort of consensus on what to do. ^blurred _peace ☮ 11:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

To be honest i have no idea what you are implying, do you mean the sub project software does not have enough powers or something?--Andy Chat c 11:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Well really, my concern is mostly towards WikiProject Software and WikiProject Computer security for two, somewhat, related reasons. As for WPCS, I see the project almost as a duplication of this project (the project page, and how we are using WPC's navigator sidebar). For WPS, I believe that they're implying a form of hierarchy (or somewhat of a bureaucracy). Why is it necessary to have project coordinators when there's only thirty-four participants (twenty-nine active)? The parentage box at WPS bothers me a bit as well, as it's a direct hierarchy (that gained no consensus on, it was just created). I would have brought this up directly with WPS but WPCS was concerned as well, so I thought this might be the best place to place my concerns. ^blurred _peace ☮ 12:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

It's a userboxes such as this that I feel are implying some sort of hierarchy to be followed (noting the number of participants and 'need' for coordinators, etc). ^blurred _peace ☮ 12:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I see you point, i would not say my experiance with porject yet would be good enough to give my opinions on it since it seems to be quite a high level problem i have only really been involved in porjects at article improvement level and suggestions as yet--Andy Chat c 12:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm ending the RfC as nobody seems to be overtly interested in discussion. I'll bring this up with the daughter projects in question respectively. Thanks for everyone's time. ^blurred _peace ☮ 00:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I will comment in detail soon, having worked with lots of WikiProjects for so long -- Tinu Cherian - 10:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Any chance of including information on differences of MPEG 2 Layer I, MPEG 2 Layer II and MPEG 2 Layer III

I got here attempting research the differneces between MPEG 2 Layer I, MPEG 2 Layer II and MPEG 2 Layer III. I am concentrating my research on playability and functionality issues. I need my MP3 files to play on the largest number of players and still retain functionality (rewind, fast forward, and scrolling through tracks are of the greatest concern). I am looking at what role the I, II vs. III layering plays in decreasing playability and functionality in the end file. Or what are the differences in the different encoder types (I hope this is the right phrase for the three "layers" associated with MPEG 2). Ultra57 (talk) 22:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you asking how to do this? or if the article should have it? before i answer i need to know befor ei might make the wrong assumption--Andy Chat c 22:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE - I may have stumbled on the wrong area of the WIKI in that I am researching for MP3's. I would still be interested in the Layer differences for this subject. I am trying to determine what the ramifications of Layer I vs. Layer II vs. Layer III have on playability and functionality. Will this change an MP3 file's ability to maybe play on an older player or will functionality be lost on those older players. Are these development phases that involved improvements to security or some other type of improvement? What are the general differences between I, II and III. I am looking at LAME and it appears to have all three layers (just depending on the version). Other encoders may have all three in various versions also. What I was attempting to determine was the ramifications and justifications for the I, II or III, and should I be expecting a IV? == Felt the WIKI would benefit from such information. Ultra57 (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

So basically you are treating this like answer forum? if so i advise you not to it against wikipedia polocies. if you want to know about techincal merits of the encoders there is a part of wikipedia where they answer those type of questions is about problem wiht the articles.--Andy Chat c 12:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Articles for deletion nomination of Grace (plotting tool)

I have nominated Grace (plotting tool), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace (plotting tool). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Papa November (talk) 12:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The OS commands collections

We've now got 161 DOS commands to approve, and 310 Unix ones. Before create the missing articles, please adopt the norm : article name = "command (DOS) or (Unix)". JackPotte (talk) 04:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] COmputing article layout

Is there any page in the project that shows hwoa page should be laid out? apart from MOS which i can not even find a link to

If not i think we should designa layout that computer article shoudl take so that we can work on getting articles up to FA status or FL status--Andy (talk - contrib) 12:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Consensus Please

[edit] List of convicted computer criminals at FLC

Please comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of convicted computer criminals/archive1. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wireless network standards

Anyone familiar with the topic? I just deprodded Isa100.11a as it is a developing standard that seems notable judging from the coverage in the tech press, but I don't know enough about this area to work on the article. Ta v much. Fences&Windows 01:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New Interaction & Usability task force

I want to contact people interested in Usability, Human-computer interaction, Information visualization, Interface design, Web design and Information architecture willing to create a task force within the WP:Computing project. The goals for this task force should be (among others):

to create and expand articles in these topics lacking content,
document the history and relevant actors of this movement,
cross-reference the primary concepts as defined in the articles,
identify Computing articles with special interest for this group,
and increase awareness of the discipline by referencing topics in this area from other computing articles when relevant.

I've not participated in any WP task force before, and I'm not quite sure what is the bureaucracy involved. How and where can I publicize this initiative, what are the required steps to create a task force, and to whom should I ask approval within the Computing project?

Thanks, Diego (talk) 14:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the information i know when i asked on helpdesk, first you ha ve to get a consensus on the parent project first and if there is then it has to be decided if the taskforce is needed.Then you have the job of creating the task force etc which i believe is fair easy compare to making sub project. There will be other on here with experaince who can better serve you if it to go ahead and help dcreate it with the experaince. Good luck.

Support as i have no objection and feel it help general imrpove these type of articles--Andy (talk - contrib) 14:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I will ~~soon~~ try to post here my rationale on why a specific task force is needed. Diego (talk) 14:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AfD - List of books on the history of computing

I've suggested at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of books on the history of computing that the article might be useful in this wikiproject's namespace, as a subpage(s). Anyone interested? -- Quiddity (talk) 03:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Conversions to/from WebArchive format

At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webarchive#Conversions under the subheading 'Conversions' I have three external links; one for each type of conversion.

Is the exceptional treatment of those three external links reasonable?

Key points:

there is much misunderstanding about WebArchive format and its place within open source

a typical misconception is that WebArchive is proprietory, and/or for Safari only

so:

in the page, I aim to draw attention to all supporting and related applications, classes, convertors and utilities

— without bias

— with special reference to conversion/interop.

Grahamperrin (talk) 09:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Manufacturers of computer peripherals including HDD

Having just bought a new Buffalo Technology external HDD from Staples in Epsom I was searching for information about the company 'Buffalo Technology' and the technology of HDD. I found it disconcerting that Buffalo Technology (aka Melco, ^[1]) was not listed as one of the 5 companies that make HDD ^[2]. Now it could be that one of the 5 make HDD for Buffalo, but there is no (none whatsoever) credit to any other company on the equipment itself or documentation or company website. I also considered if it could be that Buffalo are so small that they are not worth mentioning, though the article on HDD manufacturers strongly infers that there are no other manufacturers and a further article ^[3] lists the companies that have gone out of business. Speaking at ITCVE 2008, Dave Gibson (employee of Buffalo Technology) revealed that Buffalo was the number one memory vendor in Japan (see external reference ^[4]). I am not sure of the validity of this reference.

Is there a good reason why the pages on Melco can not be linked with manufacturers of HDD? If not I would like to propose that reference 1 is linked to reference 2 directly with an insert/edit explaining that there are other manufacturers of HDD either specifically or by reference to another list of other manufacturers of HDD (including the listed competitors of Buffalo Technology in reference 1).

There is a vaugue mention of Mitsubishi on reference 1 and Mitsubishi leaving the industry on reference 2 but then there is no actual link affiliation between Melco and Mitsubishi. This could be a red herring.

RobertHeathfield (talk) 04:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]