Jump to content

Talk:DOS

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dgpop (talk | contribs) at 01:43, 27 April 2017 (→Merge to MS-DOS). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Former good article nomineeDOS was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 20, 2007Articles for deletionKept
July 27, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
October 22, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee
WikiProject iconComputing High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.


Warning: large number of changes accidentally reverted!

This edit seems to have restored a very old version of the article. Since then, many editors and bots have updated the result to fix some individual issues created, plus a few normal edits were done on top of that. This all means we cannot easily revert the rollback. As I have time, I will start fixing this, a couple paragraphs at a time, but I hope someone else can come up with a quicker solution. --A D Monroe III (talk) 19:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A D Monroe III, How is my edit? This restored the content prior to the unhelpful reversion and new changes made by G.Reza Yahyavi Fakour. This also took out the section on 'compatability" that you removed here: [1]. I didn't have a suitable talk page message to place on the editors talk page to explain undoing all their changes, so I have pinged them. (If mine is not how you wanted it, feel free to tinker at will). All the best, Fylbecatulous talk 10:17, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And now that I am looking at their contributions, I see their user page has been deleted: 21:59, 2015 June 13 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page User:G.Reza Yahyavi Fakour (U5: Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host), so I feel you are in good shape to carry on from here. Fylbecatulous talk 10:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be an Iranian hobbyist who claims to have created two operating systems and has very limited English skills. See [ https://tools.wmflabs.org/guc/?user=G.Reza+Yahyavi+Fakour ] and [ https://fa.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B3_%28%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%85%E2%80%8C%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%84%29&action=history ], where (big surprise) he deleted large chunks of the DOS page on the Persian Wikipedia and got reverted. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fylbecatulous; I agree your revert of everything starting with the disruption is the best way to straighten this out. I was reluctant to do this because it loses other edits, but now that I've had time to review them, it seems the other edits were basically all trying to fix various bits the massive disruption anyway. Your pinging the other editors should catch anything we missed. Thanks! --A D Monroe III (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I thought as well. I carefully reviewed the history and there was no new content added in the interim. Everything that was done was an attempt to make repairs. So going back to the last available good historical version and with this questionable editor hopefully out of the picture, I wish you happy editing. Fylbecatulous talk 15:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on DOS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:16, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on DOS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to MS-DOS

Essentially the DOS and MS-DOS pages are about the same subject.

The colloquial term DOS is a shorthand for MS-DOS, and so we've got a page for MS-DOS, a page for DOS, a page for Disk operating system. MS-DOS is the root of the family. PC-DOS was a rebranded version of MS-DOS (at least for the first 12 years of its life), then later products like DR-DOS were designed to be compatible with MS-DOS. Attempting to spin this as "DOS" where MS-DOS is just one of many operating systems is misleading. Remember too that "DOS" is a generic term applying to several dozen systems dating back to the 1960s. Dgpop (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:DOS&oldid=777415733"