Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing

Datasource is not the preferred spelling

The Datasource article should be Moved to one for Data Source with links to it automatically from the alternative spelling "datasource". This also clarifies such notation as "DataSource" Tearaway (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015

Hi there; this is just a quick note to let you all know that the 2015 WikiCup will begin on January 1st. The WikiCup is an annual competition to encourage high-quality contributions to Wikipedia by adding a little friendly competition to editing. At the time of writing, more than fifty users have signed up to take part in the competition; interested parties, no matter their level of experience or their editing interests, are warmly invited to sign up. Questions are welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! Miyagawa (talk) 21:56, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Decoupled architecture

If anyone would care to take a pass at Decoupled architecture, it's currently the oldest article in all of Wikipedia tagged "too technical" (since November 2007). I think it would be best addressed by merging it into Out-of-order execution, which actually has more explanation and context. But of course any improvements you see fit would be appreciated. Thanks, Beland (talk) 03:11, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Naming the VT5xx article

In most cases, the most popular model of a given DEC terminal is the "base model", like the VT220 or 320. But in the case of their last series, it appears the 520 or 525 were the most common examples, far more so than the almost unknown 510. So, what should I name this article? It's currently under 525, is everyone OK with that? Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Looks like this whole area is calling out for a WP:SUMMARY article. {{DEC video terminals}} and wikilinks between articles is what is currently holding this together. There seems to be inconsistent titling of the articles in this series. Some are titled by the first in the series. Others are titled by the most popular or recognizable model in the series. I think WP:TITLE asks us to go with the latter so I would support a move of VT520 to VT525. ~KvnG 16:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

TRS-80 Split Proposal

I don't know if this is the best place to do it, but I'd like to draw attention to the split proposal for the TRS-80 article.

To put it briefly; the proposed split was between one article covering the original TRS-80 Model I/III/IV architecture (which was technically entirely unrelated to many later "TRS-80s" such as the Color Computer), and an "umbrella" article covering all uses of the name.

I proposed this a while back, but there was neither sufficient response nor a clear enough consensus either way to make a definite decision before the notice was taken off the front page.

I understand and agree with that- such things can't remain there forever- but it does mean that discussion has died down. If you have any opinions on it, please feel free to add them at that page! Thanks, Ubcule (talk) 22:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Atomic broadcast

I've done some re-write work at Atomic broadcast, but it could use some more work on the technical end of things, which I don't understand well enough. I'd appreciate if a smart computer science guy could help it out. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:34, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Hatchet job at Plan 9 from Bell Labs

Can we get some more Unix-tinted eyes over recent edits here please. It has even had the "all objects are either files or file systems" principles statement (sourced) removed, then removed again. There seems to be a lot of "erosion" around Plan 9 articles of late. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:19, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Article ratings

I have been contributing to Software & Computing related articles for a long time. I would like to get started in rating articles. I'm fairly unbaised in my approach which is why I usually cleanup, wikify, copy-write paras, rm advert-statements, neaten up articles, improve sections, reorder sections, and so on. I think I would be a good examiner, and I'm sure there are heaps of unrated articles or articles that could be re-rated.

I spoke to @SuperHamster: about this and he/she said that my ratings seem "solid", but I'd like to write here to (a) verify if my ratings are fine, (b) learn how to rate articles properly (yes I've read the quality assessment scale) and (c) find the list of unrated articles so I can do my thing. Copied below is the excerpt of the discussion.

Also, can I just go thru this to-do-list and rate articles based on the criteria? Is there some training or person I should confirm ratings with before committing? Whats the proper way to do this?

"Can I change page ratings as per this guide or do I have to ask? MPLAB devices is at least C if not B. MPLAB is Start, Flare3D/Away3D is C, Adobe Flash Player, Adobe AIR, SpeedTree are C or even B. PIC microcontroller is C. The rest are mostly correctly rated as Start. Am I right?"

Wonderfl ^(reply) 06:13, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Wonderfl Oop, my bad! I'd say those are pretty solid ratings - I'm not too experienced with quality ratings (especially since I'm not a member of those particular WikiProjects), but looking at the criteria, those all seem sitting. And thanks for your interest! The more we can sort articles into their respective WikiProjects, the better. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

What makes a topic notable enough to be a computing article?

Are there standards for Computing articles equivalent to having an article on Notability (computing)? How do I tell if a topic is notable? I ask because I am looking at Draft:Selmer (template engine) at Articles for Review. The article has no independent references. Looking at articles in Category:Template engines, independent references do not seem to be a requirement. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

A template engine is a type of software and we do have a software-specific essay, Wikipedia:Notability (software). But in general the notability guidelines for software are the usual guidelines: there should be multiple in depth reliable sources available for the topic. The RS are not required to be cited in an article for a topic to be notable, just available. I'm not sure how you would determine notability requirements from a category. Articles in a category could be in any state from stubs to FAs. Of the templating engines I know, ASP.NET is highly notable, with many books and articles written about it, and Apache Velocity and Template Toolkit are very likely notable, too. --Mark viking (talk) 11:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. New editors who write articles tend to look at existing articles in the category for help on how to write, then become confused when we ask for references at Articles for Creation. We do search for and add references ourselves, and keep around old draft articles with good content long after their editors have given up, in hopes of getting them into Wikipedia someday. But with a backlog of 1600+ articles waiting review, we need to see references in the articles.

I've added to the appeal at Wikipedia talk:Notability (software) that this become a guideline so it can be listed at Wikipedia:Notability with the other topic-specific guidelines. Makes our job at Articles for Creation easier. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:01, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

GNU/Linux naming controversy

The name of this article is under discussion, see talk:GNU/Linux naming controversy -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 23:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Microsoft Office Picture ManagerMarlolope6 (talk) 02:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Microsoft Office Picture Manager doesn't run in Mac OS X as is written in the "Operating system support" table.

Attention needed for proposed merger of Interix into Windows Services for UNIX

It was proposed back in 2010 that the Interix article be merged into Windows Services for UNIX. Discussion ended mid-2011 with a consensus for no merge, but was never closed, leading a different editor (uninvolved in the original discussion) to reopen discussion. I'd like some more uninvolved editors to take a look at the articles and participate in the merger discussion so we can establish whether or not consensus has changed in the past three and a half years. // coldacid (talk|contrib) 17:12, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Invention of BASIC

There is a discussion concerning who developed the BASIC programming language at Talk:BASIC#Sister Keller. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:31, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Streisand effect category deletion discussion

1. Category:Streisand effect
2. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_12#Category:Streisand_effect

Category:Streisand effect has been nominated for deletion, the discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_12#Category:Streisand_effect.

Feel free to participate there.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 02:11, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WOTgreal

I'd be grateful for anyone who can comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WOTgreal; it's been tagged for notability for 7 years. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 06:46, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

AR quizzes

I am trying to find out how many nonfiction quizzes are in the Accelerated Reader program. I can't find this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.97.68.137 (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2015 (UTC)