Computing Project‑class

This page 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 articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

Hi, everyone. In the process of researching an article recently brought to AfD, I found a couple old computing magazines that don't have articles. Maybe I'll get around to the rest of them later, but right now I'd like to work on an interesting one. It started life as a TI 99/4A enthusiast magazine named 99er, was renamed to 99er Home Computer, Home Computer Magazine, and finally Home Computer Journal. This is detailed a bit in this article at GameSetWatch. The first incarnation was announced in InfoWorld, and the publisher's problems with labor made local news here and here. There was also a little coverage in InfoWorld after the TI 99/4A ceased production. OK, so now that I've listed all my sources, what do you guys think? Is this notable? And, if so, under what name is it notable? Finally, anyone got ideas on where I can find sources about 1980s computer magazines? I've been hitting Google News Archive, Google Books, and archive.org with lots of searches, but they don't turn up much. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was it notable enough to get indexed in library catalogues (e.g. OCLC WorldCat)? That would most likely be a pass. Otherwise see if you can find enough source material to write a decent article. If you manage to do that, it's usually notable enough.

Lots of amateurs are also scanning and archiving these old computing history tidbits. So try some creative Google searches, or look at the larger archives like http://bitsavers.org. —Ruud 01:06, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't thought of that. I found a few entries at WorldCat: 99'er Magazine, 99'er Home Computer Magazine, and Home Computer Magazine. I suppose that counts for something, but with five results per entry, DGG is likely to AfD it if he sees it. Hmmm. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all. I just retired the WikiProject Amiga after attempting to contact all of the listed active members. None replied and most have not been active for at least six months now. I would be willing to help out if there are any other people interested in continuing the project. Over the last week, I made a Portal to go with the project but I have not been able to get any feedback on it as the project seems dead. Anyway, I thought I would drop a notice as far as the current stats goes to see if anyone objects. H.dryad (talk) 15:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This project has been effective in improving Amiga coverage. R.I.P. ~Kvng (talk) 13:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all! I'm posting here because I've been working on behalf of Citrix Systems to research and suggest improvements to the article for their ShareFile product. A few weeks ago, I posted a note on the Talk page with an updated draft for the article. My draft significantly condenses the material and trims out details that are either poorly sourced or extraneous. The ShareFile article seems to fall under the scope of this wikiproject, so I'm hoping someone here might be able to review it since I haven't had a response yet. Because of my COI, I will not be making any edits, but instead ask that other editors review my work and move it to the live article if they agree with the changes. I'll be watching the Talk page and can respond to any thoughts editors have. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The usage and topic of monkey test and Monkey testing is under discussion, see talk:monkey test -- 70.51.46.195 (talk) 06:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please chime in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HTTPA. —Ruud 11:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated OpenBSD for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tonystewart14 (talk) 15:12, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, folks! I've created Search query as a disambiguation page, with Database query (which redirects to Database) and Web search query. Can someone create an article about the general concept? Thanks! --NaBUru38 (talk) 12:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I have returned to point editors to the GoToMyPC Talk page, another Citrix-related article that I have been working on. I proposed a new draft a few weeks ago that I'd like for other editors to review. As stated before, I am working as a paid consultant on behalf of Citrix Systems as part of my work with Beutler Ink. I will not edit the article directly because of my COI and will only participate in Talk page discussions. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 21:13, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This request is now closed. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 16:41, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.

If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ Rob^Talk 22:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Support: This bot skips any article with conflicting classes from different WikiProjects, such as a B from one and a C from another, so it will simply fill in unassessed articles with high accuracy. Tonystewart14 (talk) 23:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I routinely fill in missing assessments manually in this manner and it would be helpful if it happened automatically. ~Kvng (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• After a few days, there appears to be some support and no opposition to opting in. You may want to consider listing this project at User:BU RoBOT/autoassess to opt-in. I'm unfollowing this project page, so please ping me if anyone has any questions that require the bot operator's response. ~ Rob^Talk 17:01, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

First post on wikipedia.

I was looking through the pages on project reality and the reality engine, and I noticed the information is quite sparse. I have a personal connection to these two projects, I am the son of the director of project reality, Jim Foran, who also directed the project that produced the reality engine.

as an example of relevance I have a link to the specifications of the reality engine which describes new methods of anti-aliasing ( in the early 1990s!), among other technological changes made to create the reality engine.

http://cva.stanford.edu/classes/cs99s/papers/akeley-reality-engine-graphics.pdf

I also have two articles referencing him and his relationship with both the reality engine and project reality:

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sv1OAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HRUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5703%2C6374787

http://www.yoyow.com/marye/mtstories/nintendo.html

rather than just start editing, I wanted to open up a discussion thread about what information is worth adding to the relevant pages. I know that I have a subjective view on the topic so I wanted input from others. thank you. Ignus.flamebringer (talk) 00:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

great info, I'd be very interested to see it, I think it's all relevant in documenting the evolution of graphics hardware. I've been trying to rework the pages on texture mapping#Hardware implementations texture mapping#Rasterisation algorithms which cover some related stuff, but I'm working from memory of mid-1990s gamedev rather than 'citable' references, maybe you can improve these Fmadd (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pleased to provide it! I will head over to the talk page for it and post the resources I'm aware of. Should I also post a similar topic in the computer graphics project? There's some information I can contribute about both hardware and software / rasterization techniques. Ignus3 (talk) 18:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all! I'm seeking opinions on whether the Citrix WinFrame entry should be merged into the XenApp article. My reasoning for this proposal is on the XenApp Talk page here. For those who don't know, I am working as a paid consultant on behalf of Citrix Systems to make suggestions to Citrix-related articles. Because of my COI, I refrain from editing any of the articles myself. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Humax Raiya Programming has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I find no evidence that this "topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and therefore don't believe that it is notable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  ★  Bigr Tex 19:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please note that Home page, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team[reply]

Hi all

I'm designing a tool for Visual Editor to make it easy for people to add open license text from other sources, there are a huge number of open license sources compatible with Wikipedia including around 9000 journals. I can see a very large opportunity to easily create a high volume of good quality articles quickly. I have done a small project with open license text from UNESCO as a proof of concept, any thoughts, feedback or endorsements (on the Meta page) would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 14:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed Draft:Fibre Channel Ports at Articles for Creation and declined it as reading too much like a list for a catalog rather than an encyclopedic draft, and noted that it had no references and did not explain how fibre channel ports are used. User:Jcran1234 then posted to my talk page:

Hi, I am looking for guidance on how to continue. I started this work by addressing the issue that the port types in the Fibre Channel article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibre_Channel) had no citations which required finding a reliable source (the Fibre Channel standards) and then updating the definitions to that reliable source. I then thought that it might be better to put that list in a separate article and referencing it in the Fibre Channel article. If this is not realistic or proper, then I will update update the list in the Fibre Channel article with this updated information. Thoughts? For what it is worth, I am also planning to update the Fibre Channel Zoning article to use information from the IETF MIB for Zoning and the Fibre Channel standards (addressing the issue to cite to reliable sources and filling in gaps of missing information).

It looks to me as if this list of types of channel ports should be added to the existing article. The filling in of gaps in existing articles is also always appreciated. (The improvement of existing articles is no harder and sometimes less hard than the creation of new articles and is also important to Wikipedia.) Robert McClenon (talk) 01:18, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Such content belongs to the already existing Fibre Channel article, there would be no reasons to split such information into a separate article. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image scaling article was a bloated mess, mostly devoted to comparison galleries of images produced by a seemingly endless list of various fairly trivial algorithms. I've now de-merged the pixel art stuff into its own article, but too much of this article is still devoted to blow-by-blow comparisons of individual algorithms with inline images that takes up a lot of space to say very little. There is a good article to be written on image scaling, which is a subject with surprisingly deep ramifications into machine vision and the psychophysics of vision, but this isn't it. -- The Anome (talk) 10:08, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and maybe even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have created this wiki page for sharing information on HPC tools. It has passed initial edit reviews but they (Robert McClenon suggested I contact this group for additional review. Can please have a look and if it is acceptable, please publish. Thank you. Smk-slab (talk) 16:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see some problems with this article:

• The tone is unencyclopedic in several places (the heading "Purpose of this page", "The following table was created based on the tools used within the United States Department of Energy (DOE) on its HPC systems. Not every tools is available on every DOE HPC system. Additions, deletions, and corrections are encouraged.")
• The taxonomy used in the article seems to be mostly an original invention instead of based on existing sources.
• The real meat of the article seems to be the section Table of HPC Tools and the rest just reads like unnecessarily verbose padding.

The only way I would see this being accepted as an article is to make it into a list:

• Rename it to List of high-performance computing software and make it clear this is a spin-out of Supercomputer#Software tools and message passing.
• Cut down on the fluff, unencyclopedic language, and make clear that the taxonomy is just a way to organize this particular list instead of some "novel contribution" that needs to be explained in-depth.
• On Wikipedia, lists of software should usually be comprised of software that already has an article on its own. Currently all the links are external links. Some of those can be changed to internal links. Those than cannot should either also have an article created about them (if they are very notable), be supported by some sources that explain their importance to the HPC field, or be trimmed from the list.

—Ruud 19:37, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]