Template:Did you know nominations/Airis Computer
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 14:51, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Airis Computer
... that Airis Computer Corporation designed their 1991 laptop with the ability to have its BIOS updated via a modem connection?Source: "For Chicago-based Airis, the bright idea is TeleROM, says Steve Valentor, engineering vice president. All Airis computers have built-in modems, and by combining that capability with a bank of flash memory that stores system BIOS, Airis can offer users a highly desired feature: instantly updatable BIOS. Simply by dialing into Airis's bulletin board, users will be able to update their BIOS for a nominal charge" (Shandle 1990).- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hixxy
Created by DigitalIceAge (talk). Self-nominated at 20:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Airis Computer, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.
@DigitalIceAge: Firstly, it's been a week since the nomination, so a QPQ must be provided as soon as possible for the nomination to pass. Secondly, the hook seems to require specialist knowledge: it requires readers to know that modem connections and computer updates via such technologies was still new in 1991. Maybe something less specialist can be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Apologies for the absence of QPQ, got majorly sidetracked on here. Perhaps:
ALT1: ... that the president of Airis Computer Corporation was previously the head of a chain of picture-framing stores?- ALT2: ... that Airis Computer's 1991 laptop could have been powered with 10 C batteries as an alternative to a rechargeable pack?
- DigitalIceAge (talk) 01:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I suppose ALT1 works (ALT2 is also a decent hook but I think ALT1 is more unusual). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I do have a minor concern with the article: maybe the sentence
The product was met with a number of delays, and Airis fizzled before the company could sell many (or any) units of the laptop.
can be rewritten? I'm not sure if "fizzled" is an encyclopedic term, and so is the use of "(or any)". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)- Replaced fizzled with dissolved and removed parentheses. DigitalIceAge (talk) 17:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- I do have a minor concern with the article: maybe the sentence
- I suppose ALT1 works (ALT2 is also a decent hook but I think ALT1 is more unusual). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Apologies for the absence of QPQ, got majorly sidetracked on here. Perhaps:
- Thank you. However, now that I think about it, I wounder if that part should be rewritten entirely; rereading the article, the claim that none were sold was never confirmed, but a claim by two separate publications. Maybe the lede should be modified to reflect that it was a claim? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure if MOS:CLAIM applies or not, but I have reworded the last couple of sentences in the lede to reflect the uncertainty. Thanks for the suggestion @Narutolovehinata5:. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. That part just needs a few minor grammar-related copyedits and this will be ready for a full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure if MOS:CLAIM applies or not, but I have reworded the last couple of sentences in the lede to reflect the uncertainty. Thanks for the suggestion @Narutolovehinata5:. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. However, now that I think about it, I wounder if that part should be rewritten entirely; rereading the article, the claim that none were sold was never confirmed, but a claim by two separate publications. Maybe the lede should be modified to reflect that it was a claim? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Full review needed; if grammar-related copyedits are still needed, they can be noted as part of the full review. Ping to nominator DigitalIceAge. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- While the article meets DYK requirements and a QPQ has been done, and while ALT1 (my preferred hook) is cited inline (and verified in the sources), I do have some concerns with the article. Apart from the earlier-mentioned need for a copyedit, I also note that the claim that the company folded in 1993 is only mentioned in the lede and the infobox, and is not mentioned in the body. It also lacks a reference. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:30, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again for the review @Narutolovehinata5: I have given the article a copyedit and removed the semicolon between the clauses of the hook fact sentence to make it directly cited. I also tweaked the wording wrt the defunct date to be less definitive. Let me know if any other tweaks need to be made. DigitalIceAge (talk) 05:19, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- The 1993 date still needs to be mentioned in the body, preferably with a source. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Found a source that confirms the 1993 date of defunctness, now included in the body. DigitalIceAge (talk) 15:46, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have a question regarding the source. It mentions that the company was defunct as of 1993, but it doesn't seem to state at all exactly when. Also, is it a reliable source? It appears to be a contributable database. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:09, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: It does say the company dissolved on 2 January 1993? Try this link. OpenCorporates pulls their information on incorporation, dissolution, registering officers etc. from state sources. Only the "corporate grouping" sidebar is user-contributed; it's useful for linking e.g. different shell corporations to a larger company if one is doing legal research, but not relevant here. In this case OC states that the incorporation and dissolution dates are crawled from https://apps.ilsos.gov/corporatellc/. I would've used the ilsos.gov site directly, but for some incredibly moronic reason ilsos.gov is entirely AJAX-based and won't generate a permalink for the Airis listing, which is next to useless for a Wikipedia citation. DigitalIceAge (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- I apologize, but I opened the link you gave me and I'm not seeing any mention of 1993. Maybe it's an issue on my end? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:22, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5:Actually you're correct, the dissolution date wasn't loaded in the archive.today link I made back in January. How strange, my apologies. I just generated a new archive link that should display it, and in any case I set
url-statustoliveso that the first thing users click on in the citation is the direct OC link. DigitalIceAge (talk) 13:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. I think all of my concerns are now addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:59, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5:Actually you're correct, the dissolution date wasn't loaded in the archive.today link I made back in January. How strange, my apologies. I just generated a new archive link that should display it, and in any case I set
- I apologize, but I opened the link you gave me and I'm not seeing any mention of 1993. Maybe it's an issue on my end? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:22, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: It does say the company dissolved on 2 January 1993? Try this link. OpenCorporates pulls their information on incorporation, dissolution, registering officers etc. from state sources. Only the "corporate grouping" sidebar is user-contributed; it's useful for linking e.g. different shell corporations to a larger company if one is doing legal research, but not relevant here. In this case OC states that the incorporation and dissolution dates are crawled from https://apps.ilsos.gov/corporatellc/. I would've used the ilsos.gov site directly, but for some incredibly moronic reason ilsos.gov is entirely AJAX-based and won't generate a permalink for the Airis listing, which is next to useless for a Wikipedia citation. DigitalIceAge (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- I have a question regarding the source. It mentions that the company was defunct as of 1993, but it doesn't seem to state at all exactly when. Also, is it a reliable source? It appears to be a contributable database. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:09, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Found a source that confirms the 1993 date of defunctness, now included in the body. DigitalIceAge (talk) 15:46, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- The 1993 date still needs to be mentioned in the body, preferably with a source. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again for the review @Narutolovehinata5: I have given the article a copyedit and removed the semicolon between the clauses of the hook fact sentence to make it directly cited. I also tweaked the wording wrt the defunct date to be less definitive. Let me know if any other tweaks need to be made. DigitalIceAge (talk) 05:19, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
