Talk:Windows Server 2012/GA3

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 02:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article put on hold due to:

Some NTFS features are not supported in ReFS, including named streams, object IDs, short names, file compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse files, hard links, extended attributes, and disk quotas.

Appears to be copied from source 34. I failed the article last time for systemic plaigirism, please check the sources in this article, I have only checked two references (one was in teh last review) and both times i came across plaigirism.

This is not a direct copy because "including" in the article is not the same as "specifically" in the source. I've checked the other sources and I'm sure there's no plagiarism, if there is, I will remove it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Im not sure that this warrants mention in the article: The Australian construction company Kennards was impressed by the stability of the OS.[53] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retrolord (talk • contribs) 03:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Despite your claims i still find that the following section is plaigirism.

Note the similarities:

named streams, object IDs, short names, file compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse files, hard links, extended attributes, and disk quotas.[35][34] (from the wiki article)

named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes, and quotas (from http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-goes-public-with-plans-for-its-new-windows-8-file-system/11666)

Please rectify this.Retrolord (talk) 03:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Further plaigirism

This sentence:

symbolic links, junction points, mount points, reparse points, volume snapshots, file IDs, and oplock. ReFS seamlessly[35]

Is copied from the source, also, the source is in the wrong spot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retrolord (talk • contribs) 03:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Further plaigirism

This sentence:

IPAM provides for administration and monitoring of servers running Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) and Domain Name System (DNS).

Copied from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831353.aspx Retrolord (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive referencing

This sentence:

Up to 1024 virtual machines can be active per host, and up to 8000 can be active per failover cluster.[29][31]

I am unsure as to what [29] has to do with it. Retrolord (talk) 03:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Look, single listings like these are not copyrightable to this extent. I've removed the redundant reference. As long as it is sufficiently paraphrased it is not plagiarism.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if they were paraphrased they would not be plaigirism. But these are not paraphrased.

Retrolord (talk) 03:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(please use indenting for readability) No, the sentences as a whole are paraphrased. Besides, anyone can say these items in that order.... does that make it a copyright violation? No. If you have big problems with that, change the order of the list accordingly, but I feel that this is not considered plagiarism.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with the intro:

The software was generally available to customers starting on September 4, 2012 and worldwide through multiple channels in September 2012.[3]

What does that mean?

Although it has a Metro user interface (which has led to a mixed reception for Windows 8), the operating system has generally received positive reviews for these features.

Implies Metro user interface is a bad thing?

Various features were added or improved over Windows Server 2008 R2, such as an updated version of Hyper-V, an IP address management role, a new version of Windows Task Manager, and ReFS, a new file system.

Implies it is better than Windows Server 2008 R2, is this the broad consensus? It mentions additions and improvements, but the metro user interface is mentioned in a negative way, so shouldnt you clarify that not everything was good?

Please work on these points. Thanks, Retrolord (talk) 03:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- I've been asked to take a look at the plagiarism concerns. "IPAM is used for administration and monitoring of servers running Domain Name System (DNS) and Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP)." is a bit too close to the source for my tastes, but Jasper Deng is right in that you can't copyright a list like that since the items can't be paraphrased as they are what the technology is called. --Rs chen 7754 03:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help Rschen7754! I'll give up on the lists, but as you said the IPAM part is too close to the source. Retrolord (talk) 03:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence is only intended to summarize. The history section and the editions section clarify it. The second sentence addresses the notion that because the OS is based off Windows 8, people might criticize it for the Metro UI as well - the sentence says nothing about the interface. The third one is clearly shown by the reception and the list of changes.
Mentioning the construction company says something about the stability of the OS, something readers are looking for.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:53, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the IPAM sentence. As for the Metro sentence, you bring up a good point. Wikipedia is about providing due weight proportional to coverage in reliable sources. "Generally positive" does not mean "exclusively positive", and a few sentences on the reception sentence mention such criticism.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence: The software was generally available to customers starting on September 4, 2012 and worldwide through multiple channels in September 2012.[3]

Does not make sense, it was generall available on sept 4, and worldwide in september? If it was already generally available on sept 4, why was it then released worldwide. i dont understand.

Also, is a construction company qualified to comment on the stability of a server OS? I would prefer it if you got another source for that point, from somewhere qualified in such matters. Retrolord (talk) 03:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is mentioned the metro interface in the lead and implied it is bad, could you add some bits into the reception section regarding this? and is there a broader consensus that metro is bad? Retrolord (talk) 04:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)A large construction company has many computers, and as the source points out, its virtualization workload tests the ability of this OS. It is very unfortunate that I could not find any other third-party reliable sources about such case studies - all the other case studies I found while Googling it were from Microsoft's own website. I got rid of the confusion in that sentence because I now feel it's not worth clarifying the actual release schedule.

It does not imply Metro is bad. It only implies that it was a point of criticism.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the construction company line, i must insist it is removed as unless you can prove they are qualified to make such statements, we cant assume its a reliable source. You dont know what the workload of that companys computers is , and anecdotal evidence is not a reliable source.

Please get sources proving metro was a source of critiscm.

Do we need the phrase "(which has led to a mixed reception for Windows 8)", perahps a note at the end of the article would serve this purpose better.

Retrolord (talk) 04:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this sentence could be worded better.

Microsoft introduced Windows Server 2012 in BUILD 2011 conference on 9 September 2011; Windows Server 2012 developer preview was released on the same day.

Retrolord (talk) 04:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ReFS resiliency features enhance the mirroring feature provided by Storage Spaces and can detect whether any mirrored copies of files become corrupt using background data scrubbing process, which periodically reads all mirror copies and verifies their checksums then replaces bad copies with good ones.

and

ReFS resiliency features enhance the mirroring feature provided by Storage Spaces and can detect whether any mirrored copies of files become corrupt using background data scrubbing process, which periodically reads all mirror copies and verifies their checksums then replaces bad copies with good ones.

Sources?

Retrolord (talk) 04:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If they run virtualization workloads on a medium-to-large scale, they're qualified. Read the source.
Please read the Reception section more carefully. It does mention criticism of Metro.
I think we do, because otherwise the reader doesn't know the purpose of that sentence.
Fixed to be more concise.
The citations are at the beginning of the section. If you feel that this is a big issue please feel free to add additional citations to those sources as necessary.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- It is anecdotal evidence, you dont know who in the company made the comment or what qualifications they have to judge it as "stable". An OS as big as this cannot be judged stable or unstable based on one piece of anecdotal evidence. This article will NOT be passed until i am satisfied on this issue, so please back up this claim
- I am unable to find any critiscm of metro specfically
- Sentence does not read properly, i think it should change but happy to hear your opinion
- Dont worry about the citations

Retrolord (talk) 04:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- - Please read the source again. The first paragraph mentions who said it. The judgement is by an IT department, a firm they hired.
  - Because simply mentioning criticism is due weight based on the coverage it got.
  - Take another look, you may have missed my latest edit, or if you didn't, make suggestions, because I think it's pretty concise as written.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft introduced Windows Server 2012 and its developer preview in BUILD 2011 conference on 9 September 2011.[7]
Even if the comments were made by the IT department, it is still anecdotal, to back up such a claim you would need multiple references and be able to prove that only a minority believed it was unstable.

Retrolord (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Sentence fixed.
- I tweaked it to clarify that it's only their opinion.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Server 2012 improves over its predecessor Windows Server 2008 R2:

Sentence seems biased against predecessor? Not sure thats appropriate.

Is scalabiltiy an appropriate heading for this section?

The new version contains new features such as CPU usage caps for particular websites,[38] centralized management of SSL certificates, and improved support for NUMA, but little else has changed.[39]

Not sure about that sentence, especially the little else has changed part, not encyclopedic tone. Retrolord (talk) 04:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure this is notable enough for mention?

The new task manager recognizes when a Windows Store app has the "Suspended" status. Retrolord (talk) 05:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scalability is the most concise title. It might be justified to move it into the system requirements section, but I don't see this as a big issue.
The "little else has changed" is in accordance with the source, though I will probably change it to "no other substantial changes were made."--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is an important feature of the new task manager. "improves over its predecessor" is justified because of the higher numbers, implicitly only in this aspect (and not in others).--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure this section is not too technical for wikipedia?

ReFS uses B+ trees[34] for all on-disk structures including metadata and file data. The file size, total volume size, number of files in a directory and number of directories in a volume are limited by 64-bit numbers, which translates to maximum file size of 16 Exabytes, maximum volume size of 1 Yottabyte (with 64 KB clusters), which allows large scalability with no practical limits on file and directory size (hardware restrictions still apply). Metadata and file data are organized into tables similar to relational database. Free space is counted by a hierarchal allocator which includes three separate tables for large, medium, and small chunks. File names and file paths are each limited to a 32 KB Unicode text string. Retrolord (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not too technical - anyone who is interested in the file system section should understand the units. Consider the target audience for this particular OS.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems fine - granted, I have a degree in computer science, but a lot of our articles get fairly technical. --Rs chen 7754 05:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As of 23 September 2012, all students subscribed to DreamSpark program can download Windows Server 2012 Standard or Datacenter free of charge.[13]

It is still correct, and it's worth mention because it's one way the software is distributed. Remember, good articles must have broad coverage.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does this warrant mention in the article? If you think it does, please also verify that it is still correct. Retrolord (talk) 05:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The new task manager recognizes when a Windows Store app has the "Suspended" status.

Despite what you said, i dont think this is an important feature of task manager. i dont think it belongs on a page about windows server 2012. Retrolord (talk) 05:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No it is. It was one of the most significant changes in Task Manager - the ability to simply pause running programs.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If that is the case then the sentence doesnt convey that meainng. To me it meant task manager now tells you if windows store is "suspeneded". Didnt come across as, you can now pause programs whenever you want.

Retrolord (talk) 05:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does convey the meaning in a concise manner, as "Windows Store" is a descriptor for "app". The "Windows Store" designation is out of lack of a better choice because Metro is only the user interface.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike its predecessor, Windows Server 2012 has no support for Itanium-based computers

Please explain why this is in the lead. I see no mention of it anywhere else in the article so i am curious. Retrolord (talk) 07:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]