User talk:Ilanrab

Your mass text removal from Grid Computing was uncalled for. Please discuss such major changes, and look at the comment i left on the Grid Computing discussion page. The spam tag at the top of the article was about commercial links, not selectively removing some opinions but not others ora 13:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC).

Ok, I saw your message on my user page. I actually _don't_ think SETI@home is a Grid, and don't think it should really be in that article, but i would like to convince people of that through _consensus_ building not blanking. I certainly don't think they invented Grid computing. If you went and looked, you'd find I didn't actually write any of that, admittedly non-ideal material, i just reverted what amounted to section blanking, as unacceptable as spam around here. If you want my opinion, the other removal of some of the dodgy commercial linkspam was certainly valid, notice I didn't revert that. That said SETI@home is clearly is a key part of the distributed computing world, which while you _and I_ feel should be somewhere else, should not just be deleted out of hand. In the current Grid world, individual projects are key (due to the large amount of work funded by governments through a huge number of projects) ,and should be mentioned. If you want to hassle me then hassle me for the way i cover the project I work for EGEE, you deleted reference to it and LCG, which while projects and so clearly not worth covering according to you, they run between them what is as far as I know (and i welcome refutations) the largest multi-domain Grid in the world, a key player in the big fora such as GGF, the main developer of components like VOMS, etc etc.

If you look around I am actually trying to organise a reorganization of the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Grid_computing/Draft_Revision , where, you'll notice, I earlier also gave my affiliation to try and avoid accusations of bias, or at least let others help me avoid them. If you want to change the article, help us write something better and then persuade people it should be implemented over the current article (i would change it in place but i feel it needs to many alterations and i didn't want to just start unilaterally changing the whole thread of the current article, hence i started the sub page for a place where people could try something new). To use wikipedia cliche's, be bold, sure, but please tryu for a consensus approach, and look carefully at what you delete. ora 23:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)