Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing

Computer/Information Security?

I can't seem to find a computer or information security task force. If one doesn't exist, I'd be willing to create one. I normally do Wikipedia for fun, since Computer Security is my day job, but I started fixing a few things a couple of days ago, and realized how much work was really needed in this area. Jclemens (talk) 21:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Please go ahead making one...I will also be happy to join ..What is the name you want to suggest ?

I propose one of the following :-

• Computer and Network Security ?
• Computer and Information Security ?

Thoughts ?? -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 07:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Either one would work. I think I prefer the latter as a bit more inclusive. I'll try and write up a bit more about what I think a scope statement ought to be, for your review. Jclemens (talk) 14:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thatz gr8... You can start building Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing/Computer and Information Security task force page... I will post a proposal at the Wikiproject Council. You need to also identify the categories within the scope. Once you are done, I will create the WP 1.0 Assessment categories and the parameters to the project banner -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 02:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I have made the proposal here -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 07:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Here's a series of in-scope topics:

• Computer security concepts, methods, and devices. Firewalls, for instance.
• Computer security historical events that received appropriate RS/N coverage--Morris worm, Code Red, etc.
• Computer security formal models, frameworks, standards, and legislation: ISO 17799, TCSEC, etc.
• Computer security practitioners, like Marcus J. Ranum which I authored.
• Computer security professional organizations, certifications, journals/magazines, etc.

Overall, I'd say that's a pretty impressive scope for the task force. Personally, I think I'm most interested in working on additional bio articles on major practitioners. Some (e.g. Dan Geer) exist but have poor and spotty coverage. Jclemens (talk) 08:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we identify the existing article categories also ? -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 08:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Category:Computer security is something to start with .. Be sure not to step into Category:Cryptography or people from WP:CRYPTO will complain like below -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 08:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Jclemens , for creating the task force pages. I have created the WP1.0 category tree for the task force.

The banner to be used is
{{WikiProject Computing|class=|importance=|security=yes|security-importance=}}

which will produce

I have also started Computer Hardware task force -- Tinu Cherian - 13:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

New Proposals for actions

I propose the follwing actions :-

• 1) Early computers task force is a task force of WP:COMPUTING. Currently they have no WP 1.0 assessment categories for quality/importance. This would mean we need to make categories for them and add the parameters for the workgroup in the {{WikiProject Computing}} banner ( "|early-comp=yes|early-comp-importance=" ) and bind them to the newly created categories. The would also mean addition of {{WikiProject Computing}} with the new parameters for articles in Category:Early computers , Category:One-of-a-kind computers, History of computing hardware.
  
• 2) WP Websites is currently without much of activity. I made a proposal for making this as a task force of WP:COMPUTING . You can see the discussion here . It was unanimously agreed upon. This would mean making categories and banner additions for the WP Websites also.
• 3) WikiProject Amiga is a descendant project which is marked as inactive. I have made a similar proposal for the project to make as a taskforce of WP:COMPUTING here.

Thoughts ?? -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 05:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

This is how the Project banner may look with the taskforce parameters

{{WikiProject Computing|class=Start|importance=Top|early-comp=yes|early-comp-importance=Low}}

-- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 07:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

• I've no strong views on this - if others agree that's fine and there's certainly plenty to do. Jamesday (talk) 23:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

• You mean that Early computers task force will be (should be?) one of the multiple task forces from WP:COMPUTING? Sounds pretty reasonable but does it fit with WP:COMPUTING vision? --pavlosh (talk) 19:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Early computers task force is already a task force of WP:COMPUTING . Currently there is no support for Early computers task force on {{WikiProject Computing}} banner and no seperate stats/categories for WP 1.0 assessments. I am proposing to do that only -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I support your proposal. --pavlosh (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a note, Early computers was moved to a task force in order to stave off deletion (as a project). It is inactive and I think the WP:COMPUTING editors should discuss whether this is a task force they really want to support, or if it's just clutter. Ham Pastrami (talk) 04:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I promise to make this task force active and hopefully more people will join in as we progress -- TinuCherian ^(Chat?) - 04:51, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

BRFA filed for the creation of WP 1.0 assessment categories for Early Computers Task force. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

WP 1.0 Categories for "Early Computers " were made as a part of BRFA trial. -- Tinu Cherian - 11:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles in Category:Early computers , Category:One-of-a-kind computers are tagged for Early Computers task force -- Tinu Cherian - 06:11, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Added support for Early computers task force , WP Websites and WikiProject Amiga in {{WikiProject Computing}} -- Tinu Cherian - 07:28, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Created WP1.0 Assessment Categories for WP Websites and WikiProject Amiga also -- Tinu Cherian - 14:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Scope of WikiProject Computing?

Hello - what exactly is the scope of this WikiProject? I don't really see a difference between this and WP: WikiProject Computer Science. I'm curious, because I've been seeing an increase in tagging for this project (for the past few days). If you tag Player Project, that's probably OK, but when I see activation function being tagged, I'm beginning to doubt the scope of this project and it's usefulness. --Jiuguang Wang (talk) 12:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

If you see the Goals and Scope of the project on the main page , This WikiProject aims to organise, expand and improve all Wikipedia's articles on areas or subjects relating to computers , computing and information technology. We have a very broad scope, so we hope to collaborate and communicate with other Wikiprojects that overlap our domain. This project is like an umberalla project for all computer and computing related topics . Computing is the activity of developing and using computer technology, including computer hardware and software. It is the computer-specific part of information technology. Computer science is the study of the theoretical foundations of computing and the application of the theories in computing. WP: WikiProject Computer Science is just a subset of the scope of this wide project. Similar to WP:Christianity and all its allied projects. The ultimate aim of our project is to identify all computer related articles, tagg , assess and improve them to the highest wikipedia standards. Please note that WP:Computers was merged to this wikiproject long back . Because this is a very broad scope project , our long term goal is to divide into lots of taskforces and rope in wikipedians of specific area of interest. Once we started to revive this relatively inactive project and started tagging articles , we discovered around 6000+ articles already without even a talk page , let alone attention of a wikiproject(read project tagging) . This effort of tagging will help us to identify lots of potentially valuable articles -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 16:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It's good that you are tagging the articles without a WikiProject, I fully support you on that. I'm just not clear on what belongs to CS and what belongs to Computing. From your comment, the separation seems to be place between theory and application, but I would argue that there is no clear separation between the two. For example, do you think your WikiProject should include Category:Artificial intelligence? There's a lot of theory in AI, but also a huge impact on the applications side (like robotics). Thanks! --Jiuguang Wang (talk) 16:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

To divide Computing and comp sc by a clear line is definitely impossible and that is why we have WP:COMPUTING which is all inclusive.... I was also thinking of adding Category:Artificial intelligence also , but I I felt it is not exactly computing alone but overlaps with Robotics , Technology and Engineering. Therefore I decided to add them after a discussion later. In the long run , we may decide to do away with multiple banners and have a single {{WikiProject Computing}} banner with taskforce or descendant wikiproject banners -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 16:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I also think that Computing has a greater scope than CS - I think there should be a quick merge of the two WikiProjects under Computing to reduce the confusion. Thanks for your inputs, Cherian! --Jiuguang Wang (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your inputs and suggestions. Hopefully we may see a major consolidation of computer related wikiprojects and more activity ... I guess may be you can consider to join us too -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 17:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Iraq the model was recently tagged and I don't see how this could possibly fall under the Computing project. Assuming I'm correct, how do I remove the tagging so it doesn't happen again? tvillars (talk) 21:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

The reason this happened the above article falls under Category:Internet stubs . I have overlooked that this entire cat may fall under this project scope. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.. We will take care -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 04:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, I wouldn't mind seeing computer science folded into a task force. Despite the size of its scope, it actually is highly inactive as a project, and I think it could potentially benefit from the infrastructure of a bigger project. Ham Pastrami (talk) 13:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Delisting of history of computing hardware from the Featured article set.

After some months of effort, the Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of computing hardware is still on the block for its star to be chopped off. You are welcome to work on this article to keep it featured. Come join the fun. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 10:29, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The Featured Article Reviewers have wondered aloud why more editors do not jump in and contribute to save this article from losing its star. Some of the tasks remaining include fixing citations and a general copyedit. You are welcome to go to Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of computing hardware and ask the Featured Article Reviewers what more needs to be done. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 07:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 633 of the articles assigned to this project, or 31.2%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subsribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done : Added the template to the main page -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 04:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Definition of Win32??

If you look around Microsoft's site long enough, you will find that "Win32" started between Win 3.11 and Win95a, with the release of the Win32s library.

When people say software runs on "Win32", they rarely, if ever, mean it needs the Win32S layer in Win 3.11

A few years ago, "Win32" meant anything from 98SE forward. And this is still current usage on websites for software that isn't currently being upgraded regularly.

In some cases it still means this, in some cases it means Win2K forward, in some cases XP forward, and in all too many it seems to mean people upgraded their compilers or libraries and didn't read the docs or change settings as needed, and it means the program is compiled to run on XP only even though it doesn't use any resources or system calls exclusive to XP.

I don't imagine people will quit using 98SE because Microsoft says so, any more than they will abandon Linux for Vista because Microsoft says so.

I am requesting that the term "Win32" simply be abandoned, and replaced in every instance with a more stable, more accurate term.

The people still using 98SE or WinME or Win2K can live with reading docs to find out whether something supports their OS. They are used to this. They can't necessarily deal with stupid installers that overwrite system files without checking for the appropriate OS (the same filename and a newer version number are just NOT GOOD ENOUGH to identify an appropriate update for Windows - its versioning system is not that simple), or situations where you have to manually track the version number of every library called by every library the software uses, to discern whether it has any XP-only components. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.180.126 (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually Win32 started with Windows NT 3.1. It was retrofitted in the form of Win32s (s for subset) into Win (16-bit) 3.11 (source compatibility only).

I'm not sure what you're asking for re. "abandoning" the term. What term would you suggest, and what do you want it to mean? Really, a "Win32 app" is simply one that is written to and linked against the Win32 APIs (as opposed to WIn16, or the native APIs, or the Posix APIs under WinSFU, etc.).

As far as MS is concerned the term is not and isn't supposed to reference any particular version of Windows.

In general a "Win32 app" built for a given version of Windows will run on any later version of the same OS family: Win95 through Win98 and ME are one family, NT 3.1 through NT 4, Win2K, XP, etc. are the other. (Heck, I'm currently running Kermit 95 (yes, built for Windows 95) on Vista x64.) Even cross-"family" things will work as long as you are on a later version and the app doesn't use family-specific features. A huge example of family-specific features would be security: The 9x family has all the APIs but it's as though all the "locks" are always unlocked; all access checks simply succeed. An app written to expect that behavior might have a tough time on the NT family.

It's tough to abandon a term that's still an official Microsoft term. Again, what term (or terms) would you suggest as replacements? What else could mean "written to the Win32 API"?

A bizarre twist: It's still called "Win32" in its 64-bit form on x64 and Itanium. Even though pointers, handles, and things derived from those types are now 64 bits wide. So you could argue successfully that "Win32" means even less than it used to because it no longer even implies a 32-bit app! Still, it's MS's term for that concept and that's a very tough stream to swim against. Jeh (talk) 09:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I have found that a more "accurate" (by virtue of being a little less precise) term to refer to "apps written to the Win32 API" is "unmanaged code". This is often used by Microsoft and the development community to distinguish "Win32 code" from ".NET code" (which is more accurately/formally called "managed code").

Unmanaged code is generally written in C or C++, and calls any of the native Windows APIs. Managed code is written in one of the managed (i.e. .NET) languages, and calls any of the .NET classes. (Either of these can also call third-party libraries compiled in their respective unmanaged/managed state.)

Q: Would this distinction help those who wish to be more accurate (than the arguably more confusing "Win32")? It would almost certainly need to be accompanied with parenthetical references to the commonly-(mis)used "Win32" and similar terms, just to make sure those who still use that terminology aren't left scratching their heads. However, I'd certainly favour the unmanaged code/managed code approach.ParanoidMike (talk) 01:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

There's no context to this discussion. Where, specifically, has the use of "Win32" become problematic? I will agree that, where possible, a more accurate and less technical term be used. But this should not be applied as a rule, in any case. Wikipedia does not ban or censor words. Ham Pastrami (talk) 04:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - , member of WikiProject Council. 13:46, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

System_Architecture_Evolution

Hi,

the article System_Architecture_Evolution should be classified as Top Importance and would need further development. It is important as it will be the 4th generation mobile network technology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.33.106.4 (talk) 15:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

All code in templates proposal

Please take a look at my proposal at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#All_code_samples_should_be_transcluded, and respond on that page. Thanks! Dcoetzee 00:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for New Page

I would like to request a new page on Nexsan Technologies to complement this page [[1]] Nexsan is one of only a few companies on this list that do not have a brief history page and they fit the guidelines for when a company is typically included in Wikipedia. Disclosure, I have a COI in that I work as a consultant to Nexsan. I will volunteer information via talk pages from public sources, and allow the community to determine what to include. I will not engage in editing directly any Nexsan-related page. Anyone wishing to contact me may do so at [rbectel@newventurecom.com] or via my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RMBECTEL (talk • contribs) 15:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Prices

The pricing given is not just for the companies that are posted. Many other companies has reduced their price into the same ranger per GB (i.e. Samsung, OCZ). In fact, the price dropping was first done by OCZ.

That part needs to be either deleted or edited for factual accuracy.

Huh? Ham Pastrami (talk) 13:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The latest DNS flaw

Can someone please update the DNS_cache_poisoning page in view of the latest discovered flaw? Thanks. Imagine Reason (talk) 16:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Integrated banner for Descendant Projects

I am proposing the use of the integrated banner of {{WikiProject Computing}} for the descendant projects , if there is a consensus among the project members...
Example :

{{WikiProject Computing|class=start|importance=Mid|science=yes|science-importance=low}}

will produce...

• This project and its autonomy will remain the same...
• No pages have to be moved as a task force.

The advantages of this are :-

• Intergated banner which takes up less space and avoid clutter of different Computer related WikiProjects.
• Greater co-operation and co-ordination among computer related wikiProjects.
• Each WikiProject doesnt have to maintain an assessment department...Since the standards for WP 1.0 Assessment is same for all WikiProjects, single assessment is only required for all the computer related WikiProjects. This means more time for individual computer wikiprojects to help and improve the articles in their scope..
• Seperate stats for quality and importance for both parent and descendant projects ( as before)
• Catergory intersection of quality and importance available like Category:Amiga articles by quality and importance for WP:Amiga

Possible Actions:

• Replace {{WikiProject Computer science}} with {{WikiProject Computing}} and our project parameters in the article talk pages .
• Copy the importance in existing {{WikiProject Computer science}} to |science-importance= in {{WikiProject Computing}} banner.

Thoughts ??

• WikiProject Computer networking: I have made a proposal for a intergrated banner for the WikiProject Computer networking here . I invite you for your valuable comments in the discussion. Thanks -- Tinu Cherian - 11:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
• WP:Computer Science : Proposal made to WP:Computer Science can be found here -- Tinu Cherian - 02:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
• WP:Software : Proposal made to WP:Software can be found here -- Tinu Cherian - 13:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

• Vehement Oppose - I oppose this integration so far as it would include any project that is not marked as "inactive." Any active project no matter how small or how closely tied to this project should remain fully autonomous and I propose that insofar as this project overlaps those its scope should be reduced to alleviate the overlap rather than trying to make this an overarching superproject. This project does not have the level of activity or participation necessary to care for all of the articles within its current scope and it should therefor not try to enforce its will on any other active project. Adam McCormick (talk) 16:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Pixologist rewritten

Hi, I've rewritten pixologist and encourage you to visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pixologist to see if concerns have been addressed. Please note that a name change to pixel artist is almost assured if the article is kept. ;;Banjeboi 21:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Knol site infringing on Wikipedia articles about computing

The site http://knol.google.com/k (Knol) is mirroring articles, in part or in whole, from Wikipedia about computing without any acknowledgement of Wikipedia or the GFDL. See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/Knol for more information. I have flagged a few knol articles, but I have not made any further contacts with Knol about the infringement because any complaints should come from contributors to one or more of the articles. If any editor who has contributed to any of the affected articles about computing in Wikipedia wants to pursue this, please follow the process described in Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks#Non-compliance process. (I adapted this message from Donald Albury's) -84user (talk) 16:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Microsoft's SQL Server

I'm just an ordinary person trying to find out what Microsoft's SQL Server is - like can I remove the 4 SQL programs, which, among all sorts of other junk, are filling up my new Vista laptop. But Wikipedia's explanation is just like the rest, it just doesn't get around to being that simple for the one or two sentences it would take to explain what it does in completely lay terms. Thanks anyway! Numus (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

MBTA vs. Anderson

I would appreciate if anyone could lend a hand in fleshing out the MBTA vs. Anderson case. Madcoverboy (talk) 19:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Error that needs corrected

The Palm OS Simulator page has a factual error. See its discussion page.

GeneWeb should be maintained

GeneWeb should be maintained as it is one of the beste and most complete application to build and maintain a genealogic database. It offers perfect solutions for working either local or over the web (as I do) and it creates lists and reports which are ready to publish

82.92.154.216 (talk) 07:59, 26 August 2008 (UTC) Herman van Twillert

Need Review Help

I am looking to create a new article for Abaca Technology Corp, an anti-spam provider. I do in fact work with the company. I was told that this is the best place to get feedback on the article etc.

Would definitely appreciate some help/feedback/comments or someone to steer me in the right direction.

Draft on my user page

Thanks in advance

Jbiggs19 (talk) 19:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I looked over the article, and the history section looks well referenced. I think the products section needs some expansion. Right now it does kind of look like advertising. Rather than just listing the products that they have and the version, try say what in general their products do, and then include their products when talking about specific features. Just a thought though... SOL Basic 22:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Truss (Unix) directs to page with no mention of it

Hi,

Went looking for information on the Unix (solaris) command "truss", and got specifically redirected to a page for it... that contains no mention of it whatsoever:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truss_(Unix)

Seems a bit wrong... ?

128.184.132.38 (talk) 23:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

This may be because it is a Unix Utility, but it is not included in the IEEE standard. I haven't looked at the standard, so I can't say for sure. SOL Basic 01:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiGroup Hacking

I'd like to propose a WikiGroup under WikiProject Computing for a social Wikipedian group to discuss hacking. --Melab^-1 00:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

What, precisely, do you *mean* by hacking? There's already a Computer and Information Security task force. Do you propose a "computer enthusiasts" group, or a "computer criminals" group? Jclemens (talk) 01:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

A computer enthusiasts groups not a criminals group. And I'm not talking about sharing criminal tips. --Melab^-1 23:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

ITIL - Definition of Service Request needed

In reviewing the content of the ITIL page, I noted that while there are references to "Service Request Management" (as defined under separate topic) and the "Service Reqeuest", the term Service Request is never defined.

ITIL apparently offers no clear definition here, so I would propose the following:

- A Service Request is any request to the Service Desk submitted by a User

While this seems somewhat simplistic and circular, I am intentionally avoiding the issues which come into play by introducing terms like "incident" or "change", and for this reason. When a user submits a Service Request to the Service Desk, they are simply requesting service. It is up to the Service Desk to determine how to classify the request either as an incident (service not performing according to configuration or specification) or change (change to the configuration, environment, or infrastructure).

Given the amount of confusion around this term (i.e. - is Service Request the same as Change Request?), I think that calling out a clear definition here would be helpful.

01:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot assisted Auto Assessment

Now TinucherianBot is able to autoassess for a wikiproject based on already assessed other project ratings on the same article talk page( see BRFA ).

The bot basically does this : It looks at the Talk: page for an article, and looks at the classes it has been given. Then, it adds the highest class to the template for the project that it is working for, say {{WikiProject Computing}} here. E.g. if a talk page of article has one Project banner with 'Start' class and 'B' class from another Project banner, '|class=B' will be added to the Project banner class to our project banner.

Currentlty there are over 18,000 Unassessed articles for our project and I was thinking whether we should this excerise for WP:COMP. We had done such exercises for project like WP:INDIA, WP:Christianity etc and was very successful.We may get a very few false positives (less than 5% (max) I would imagine) but it's a small price to pay for the huge benefit of automation. Also, a false positive is likely to result in the article being identified and properly assessed, which might not otherwise happen. This process saves hours of work for human editors, leaving them free to actually improve the articles in question. Thoughts? -- Tinu Cherian - 07:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review for Sinclair ZX Spectrum

Just a note to let the project know that this article has been placed on hold following its GA Sweeps Review, which can be found here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Asus contains apparent opinion / editorializing with suspicious cites

Asus contains a section Asus#Poor_RMA_support_in_the_UK.2C_and_similar_issues_in_the_USA with what looks to me like opinion / editorializing, and which is cited to various online forums and blogs which would seem to me to fail WP:RELIABLE. Could people who are familiar with this topic please review this and adjust anything that needs it? Thanks. -- 201.17.36.246 (talk) 00:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed archive for cited web pages

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Wiki_cache_for_references has a proposal to cover the risk of cited web pages going offline or being taken over by advertisers / domain resellers. Computing articles are vulnerable because a lot of coverage is web-based. I suggest WikiProject Computing should pitch in, and also post on the Talk pages of any other Wikiprojects that would be seriously hurt by the disappearance of important pages / sites. I've posted similar notices at WP:DINO, WP:PALEO ,WikiProject Chess and WikiProject Video Games. -- Philcha (talk) 10:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the motivation, since web pages that cover computer topics are likely to become obsolete and be taken down, even if the domain doesn't go away. (How many web-based references will you find for the ISA bus these days? What about MCA?) However, is there a reason that the archives at [2] aren't suitable or sufficient? Perhaps WF could work together with archive.org to ensure that the pages referenced here, even the specific versions referenced here, are archived. Jeh (talk) 12:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Is Universal Product Code in your project's scope?

An IP user has recently added your project's banner to Talk:Universal Product Code, along with several others and other talk page banners. If this article is really in your project's scope, please rate it; otherwise please remove the banner. Thanks! Anomie⚔ 21:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

SF framing content is not matching with the diagram of figure 2

Hi, In SF framing section of DS1 aricle is given that

1. The terminal frame alignment channel is carried in odd-numbered frames inside the super frame and occurs with the DS0 channel synchronization.

2. Signaling frame alignment channel is carried in even-numbered frames inside the super frame and is used for signaling frame alignment

In the figure 2 of this section it is written that Singal frame alignment bits 101010. [Took all the odd numbered frame] Terminal frame alignment bits 001101. [Took all the even numbered frame]

If I am not wrong then according to point 1 & 2 mentioned above

Terminal frame aligment bits should be 101010 and Signal frame alignment biths should be 001101.

Would you please help -- whether I am right or wrong in pointing out the problem in the content or my understanding about the matter needs more polish

SF framing content is not matching with the diagram of figure 2

Hi, In SF framing section of DS1 aricle is given that

1. The terminal frame alignment channel is carried in odd-numbered frames inside the super frame and occurs with the DS0 channel synchronization.

2. Signaling frame alignment channel is carried in even-numbered frames inside the super frame and is used for signaling frame alignment

In the figure 2 of this section it is written that Singal frame alignment bits 101010. [Took all the odd numbered frame] Terminal frame alignment bits 001101. [Took all the even numbered frame]

If I am not wrong then according to point 1 & 2 mentioned above

Terminal frame aligment bits should be 101010 and Signal frame alignment biths should be 001101.

Would you please help -- whether I am right or wrong in pointing out the problem in the content or my understanding about the matter needs more polish

Regards,

Somnath