Talk:Design Patterns

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Books (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (marked as Mid-importance).
 

Move[edit]

Hmmm, A couple of thoughts on this entry: 1)shouldn't, perhaps, the 'Design Patterns' page be about the concept of design patterns, with a reference to the Gang of Four book of the same title as one of the primary works on the subject? There is much more to say about design patterns than appears in the GOF book, and there are other books on the subject. 2)Does listing a books table of contents count as plagerism?


Agreed. There's already Design pattern (computer science) for the concept in general -- so if this article is to be about the book, it should bear the name of the book. -- Tarquin 19:29 Sep 22, 2002 (UTC)

So, who's going to do it? RodrigoBelo 23:16 Nov 5, 2002 (UTC)


Agreed

Design Patterns CD[edit]

the usefull resource for this book is a CD version - maybe this should also be put somewhere on this page?

Gamma, Erich, Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, and John Vlissides (1997). Design Patterns CD. ISBN 0201634988.

Year of publication?[edit]

At the bottom it says books from 1994, but is this correct? I would expect a line like: The book was first published in 19xx, with a much improved second edition in 19xx ...

No, this is the correct version. We're still using it as a Textbook. The book basically is the bible of Design Patterns.

Requested move 5 January 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No consensus regarding this move. (non-admin closure) -- Dane talk 22:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)



Design PatternsDesign Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software – Seems to conflict with the article Design pattern (for the concept of a design pattern). Nerd1a4i (talk) 22:08, 5 January 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. -- Dane talk 03:34, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose - unnecessary disambiguation (the move target is already a redirect here), and there is a hatnote at the top of both pages. I'm not sure what sort of conflict is present. Primefac (talk) 22:14, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Support – the full title seems appropriately precise, while the short title does not. Dicklyon (talk) 04:44, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Just as a note regarding this point, only one incoming wikilink out of roughly 100 is from the full title. About 3/4 of the links are directly to this page. This makes me think that people do know where they're pointing their links. Primefac (talk) 04:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A classic case of a small difference in styling being a perfect disambiguation. Andrewa (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.