This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games 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.
I put up the tag that mentions how there is information missing when it comes to women in computing in this article. Lovelace isn't mentioned and the use of computer to refer to women isn't mentioned at all in this article (human computer talks about humans as computers and even has a pictures of woman being computers). My changes to this article are to include the usage of computer being used to refer to humans, especially female humans.--JasonMacker (talk) 00:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Speaking about Ada Lovelace, it occurs to me that there is also information missing about drug addicts in computing, and other groups, such as homosexuals. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 17:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I replaced the artificially darkened picture of the ENIAC with a much clearer one of the main control panel.--JasonMacker (talk) 01:05, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Has this issue now been resolved with the addition of information about Lovelace? I'm assuming it has (given the lack of discussion in this section for quite a long time, and the fact that I can't see a problem with this article any more), so I'll remove the tag, let me know if there still are issues, so that the tag can be put back. Cliff12345 (talk) 02:13, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
As much as I understand the appeal of, and even delight in the idea that the world's first computer programmer was a picturesque Victorian-era noblewoman with a flowery name and title (who moreover happened to be the daughter of a celebrated and influential Romantic poet), I sense a subtle sexist double standard here: Babbage was at least equally important to the history of the computer – Babbage could be described as the inventor of computing hardware and Lovelace of software –, but only Lovelace is depicted here, while a portrait of Babbage is not included (although available). Keep in mind that this helps perpetuate the insidious stereotype that women's primary function is decorative, not intellectual. I'm not trying to insinuate any of this to be conscious, let alone intentional, lest I offend the principle of assuming good faith, but it's worth considering.
It might seem like a trivial detail if you've never really tried to understand feminism and what it is really all about (I would never have spotted subtle details like this either not long ago, and even considered it ridiculous to find fault in something like this), but once you develop a sensitivity to the issue, it does stand out. Especially since mention of Ada's role was added to the article specifically to further the cause of feminism. I'm sure you guys are well-intentioned, in fact! (I'm a guy myself, by the way – my first name appears feminine to many Anglophones, I've found.) --Florian Blaschke (talk) 13:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
I have a video that I would like to embed in the computer components section of a wikipedia article. I had to create it for school, at Alverno College. Can you give me permission to embed this video. It is one minute and 54 seconds long.
This is a digital representation of the components of a "slimline" desktop computer.
Please tell me exactly where you want this video and how you want it formatted and I'll consider adding it for you. Your alternative is to make ten useful edits in the next four days which will make you autoconfirmed and allow you to edit it yourself. Technical 13 (talk) 02:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)