Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Proposed deletion of Lib Sh

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lib Sh, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?Disavian (talk/contribs) 21:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


Keyboard is a disamb page, which lists among others Alphanumeric keyboard and Keyboard (computing), along with IBM PC keyboard and Apple Keyboard.
It seems to me that the first two of these should definitely be merged, and I question whether it's logical to list keyboards of individual manufacturers on the disamb page. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 23:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Paging vs. Swapping

It is possible to use paging without swapping. This is done in embedded systems. In this case, only code and constants are paged, while data pages cannot be "swapped out".

Since paging is possible without swapping, why does the Wikipedia insist that the terms are almost interchangeable? (talk) 09:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC) André Dolenc

Template:Infobox One-of-a-kind computers

I've written a new template, {{Infobox One-of-a-kind computers}}. Feel free to add parameters. Computers in Category:One-of-a-kind computers can use it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


Do databases fall within the portfolio of this WikiProject? If so, why do they seem to be omitted from the list? If not, why not? Does some other group handle DB, DBMS, etc.? If so, who are they?

Thank You! — Xiong (talk) 04:51, 2005 Mar 29 (UTC)

Database itself is a large topic, and 90% of all advanced database systems are not simply just built on DBMS, ODBC-JDCBC and RDBMS, that is just a VERY small part of database. The architecture involve a great deals of workstation multi-core architecture with wise interconnect selection, technologies supported in the types of storage (e.g. Holograms, Hard Drive or SSD), function of each chip (some companies expect the chip to be so detailed that you have to be able to program the SoC [System on Chip]), ability of XML compatibility and ability of database replacement (such as replacing the SQL for Microsoft access along with Window Media Player .asx playlist file (object) for faster streaming media via FTP to provide better security, due to DRM [Digital Right Management] implementation), ability of virtualize interface management for GoS and QoS, database network mapping and trafficking ...etc and so forth. --Ramu50 (talk) 02:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Databases definitely falls within the scope of this project -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 11:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Java programming language

Java programming language is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy


hey saw an article was needing an expert so i fixed the article (basic4gl). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madcowpoo (talkcontribs) 18:39, 2 October 2006

Computer power supply

Hello. I would request that someone with expertise in electronics, electricity/energy and power supplies take a look at the computer power supply article and possible contribute to it.


The history section of Laptop is mighty big and probably could use its own article page. Any thoughts?

Product Support Services

Hi, I am doing a class project in which I am in charge of writing a paper and presentation on Support. We are creating a fictional project and going through all the following processes: Marketing, Architecture & Design, Development, Testing, and Support. I have been googleing various ways in which product and/or services are supported. Unfortunately when I came to wikipedia all I found was an short article about Microsoft's Product Support division. It would be nice for someone to expand on this and include all the other companies that specialize in being the outsourced product support center as well as the various ways in which products are supported (i.e: JAVA chat applets, call centers, FAQ wizards, online support tickets). Just thought I would throw that out there. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)


Does the first paragraph of this topic really need a comment on how to use the word grammatically? Suggestion: Let's reserve the first paragraph (at least) for the main point and move (much) further down the fact that FLOPS is plural and singular.

History of computing hardware

History of computing hardware has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

See how it has changed in the last week.

Your contribution is welcomed; be bold. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 16:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

See how it has changed in the last week. Anyone? --Ancheta Wis (talk) 18:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
See how it has changed between May 18th and today. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 10:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Major revamping of the Project Page

I felt that the earlier project page was cluttered and not very appealing. I am doing ( WP:BOLD ) a redesign of the page with a portal box format. Please let me know you suggestions, concerns and thoughts here-- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 04:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done Initial changes are completed -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 09:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
This is the changes I have done -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 04:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to AutoTagg articles with {{WikiProject Computing}} for the descendant wikiprojects articles

Descendant WikiProjects
Computer networking
Computer science
Free Software
Microsoft Windows
Programming languages

I have indentifed the above projects that comes under the scope of our project. My idea is to autotagg the articles that comes under our descendant projects also by a bot. TinucherianBot can do this job. It will automatically build lists of articles from the selected categories ( eg: Category:WikiProject Computer networking articles and checks for {{WikiProject Computing}} banner on the talk pages. It will add our banner if not already present. Thoughts ? -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 08:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I have sent personal notes to all members -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 15:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I am being WP:BOLD and started tagging for the following with TinucherianBot

Descendant WikiProjects Status
Amiga Doing...
Computer networking  Done
Computer science Doing...
Free Software Doing...
Microsoft Windows
Programming languages
Software Doing...

-- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 06:32, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

=Section Break

Please don't mass tag talk pages of "descendant WikiProjects" with "{{WikiProject Computing}}". I came here since your bot is mass tagging talk pages that already have "{{CryptographyProject}}" on them. Similar "descendant tagging" has happened before and consensus each time has been to not do it.
First of all: You should consult those WikiProjects before you do such a thing.
And secondly: Not all crypto articles are computing articles. Some are only or mostly about crypto maths. Or are you going to mass tag all maths articles with "computing" too?
--David Göthberg (talk) 13:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Please understand these are done in in good faith . We do understand All cryptography is not computer /computing . Only Category:Cryptographic protocols are tagged which falls under the scope of this project. With primary objective of wikiprojects is to improve articles in their scope , why this serious objections? We have taken note of your concern ..... With this tagging effort , we have tagged around 8000 newer articles that didn't even have a talk page , let alone the other wikiproject tagging. This reveals the potential of this project. Please read the below section on the discussion on the scope and goals of this project -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 15:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Sure, I understand this bot run was done in good faith. And I guess you were not aware of older discussions when for instance WikiProject Cryptography didn't want the maths WikiProject to mass tag all crypto articles. (They actually had a bot running tagging all crypto articles no matter if they were math related or not.)
Okay, it is good that you understand that not all crypto articles are computing related. (Some are instead maths related and some are spy/war related.) But since you had not contacted WikiProject Cryptography and told what kind of crypto pages you wanted to tag I could not know that. Instead I as a crypto editor without warning got LOTS of crypto pages popping up in my watchlist with your bot edits. Actually, I read several of your pages, especially the text in this section above, and that indicated to me that you perhaps intended to go on and tag all crypto articles.
So, I think you should contact all the WikiProjects in your list above and discuss this before you go on. The least you could have done was to inform the WikiProjects before you did the bot run. But I think you should not just inform them, you should also discuss it. That is, inform them of your intention and then wait some day(s) before you do the bot run to see if some discussion ensues.
Note that blocking a bot is not like blocking a user. Bots can be blocked whenever there is some problem that need to be discussed or fixed. And they can be blocked even if they haven't ran for some time. Since there is no way an admin can read your mind and know when you are going to run your bot the next time and if it then are going to continue with the same settings or not. Blocking a user locks them out from Wikipedia and their edits are much slower than a bot so it is not that serious if they get to do some more mistakes. Blocking a bot only means that you have to wait a little more until you can start the bot again, provided you fix what needs to be fixed or explain what needs to be explained to be allowed to run the bot again. Note that such "blocked your bot until we have discussed this" does not affect your standing as a Wikipedia editor and in most cases has no effect on any future run for adminship for you etc.
So I will not unblock your bot until you have discussed with the WikiProjects in the list above or until you state that you only will use the bot for other tasks while you wait for the response from those WikiProjects.
--David Göthberg (talk) 16:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The bot had stopped running much hours before you had blocked it.It is unfair to block it arbitrarily without verification of whether the bot is still running. Please don't own articles. The bot didn't blindly tagg the articles of your interested project but ran only on Category:Cryptographic protocols which definitely comes under the scope of this project. The bot is stopped now and also needed for other activities . The bot _WILL_NOT_BE run for this project tagging unless before further consensus . We had _ALREADY_ started the discussion with the descendant projects like here. The idea of Wikiprojects is to identify the articles that falls under its scope and not to disrupt them. Nothing happens more than collaborative efforts from more interested and experienced people by adding an additional project banner on its talk page. Hence we request you to kindly unblock the bot asap. -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 17:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, relax. Remember, bot blocks are nothing dramatic, not at all like user blocks. Oh, I checked, seems you are a new bot owner. You will soon get used to that your bot gets blocked every now and then, that is normal. Actually, as far as I know that is one reason why we use special bot accounts, so we can block the bots even for minor things, without blocking the user. And to not pollute the user's block log with the bot blocks.
You don't seem to fully understand how bot blocks work. Bot blocks are done more or less preemtively to give time to investigate and discuss. During that time the bot remains blocked. So with bots we block first and verify later, not the other way around like we do with users. The reason we do like this is of course that it is much easier for a bot to wait a day than it is for other editors to (often manually) revert the edits done by a bot. And I actually did do quite some checking and even discussed it with other admins before I blocked your bot.
Well, you had not contacted WikiProject Cryptography before you started bot tagging crypto articles. Contacting one WikiProject and then tagging another doesn't cut it. And the discussion you link to is not even about the tagging, but about other things. And I don't even see any editors in this "umbrella" WikiProject that has commented about this tagging yet. So I don't see any consensus for your bot run anywhere.
So, do you mean you will stop tagging only crypto pages or will you stop tagging all descendant WikiProject pages? That is, until you have discussed this with those WikiProjects. Before I know what you mean I can not unblock your bot. It's the "this project" part of your statement above that is unclear to me, do you mean "this" umbrella project and thus all the "descendant" projects, or did you mean "this" as in the cryptography WikiProject? See, I react because I am an admin, not because I am a crypto editor, so to me it is not enough if you only leave crypto articles alone.
I should perhaps explain: I reacted primarily since I thought you might be tagging also articles that do not fall within the scope of computing. Since I have seen bots do that before when using categories of "descendant" WikiProjects. That concern has now been alleviated by your responses. But I also reacted since the only time I have been involved in a discussion whether to tag with both the umbrella and the descendant WikiProject or only tag with the more specific descendant WikiProject(s), then consensus was to only use the more specific WikiProject tag. However I am not an expert on WikiProject tagging and I have seen that lately people often put a whole bunch of WikiProject tags on talk pages. So therefore I ask that you first discuss with the descendant WikiProjects to achieve consensus for this. Or if you know of any guideline or centralised discussion or similar about this that you point me to it. But even if there is a guideline I ask that you inform the descendant WikiProject what kind of tagging you are going to do.
So, when I have your answer what you mean with "this project" I might be able to unblock your bot.
--David Göthberg (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Inspite of clearly stating that We are not tagging ANY further without further consensus , you have not unblocked the bot which is unacceptable from the admin. A WikiProject is a collection of pages devoted to the management of a specific topic or family of topics within Wikipedia; and, simultaneously, a group of editors that use said pages to collaborate on encyclopedic work. See , Nobody owns the articles in Wikipedia , neither does wikiprojects. We have already stated that we are not blindly tagging any descendant projects ( that exactly wont match in terms of scope) like Crypography or AI etc but on specfied categories as needed. Hence The bot didn't blindly tagg the articles of WikiProject Cryptography but ran only on Category:Cryptographic protocols which definitely comes under the scope of this project. You mean to say WP Christianity cannot tag articles of the scope of WP:Catholicism or WP:Anglicanism ? At projects like these we are moving towards the idea of even single common parent project banner upon consensus. The idea of Wikiprojects is to identify the articles that falls under its scope and help to improve them and not to disrupt them. Nothing happens more than collaborative efforts from more interested and experienced people by adding an additional project banner on its talk page.Therefore , with all due respect, we request you to kindly unblock the bot -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 01:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I oppose the idea of mass tagging article talk pages, that already belong to related WikiProjects. However I think that a mass merge between WikiProject Computer Science and WikiProject Computing would be a good idea, because as of right now there is no clear line separating the two projects. I'll unblock the bot as long as you agree to discontinue the tagging. --Chetblong (talk) 02:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Chetblong: It seems to me that TinuCherian has agreed not to continue tagging "without further consensus". So I will unblock his bot now.
TinuCherian: Since you are a bot owner I recommend that you get used to first answering the questions before you repeatedly demand to have your bot unblocked. However it seems to me you have now answered the questions and the answers hint that you will run the bot in a fairly decent manner, so now I will unblock your bot.
Though I feel you have a week feel for what consensus means and for the concerns I raised. As I mentioned above, yes the only time I have seen a discussion (involving many editors) about when to add and when not to add WikiProject tags the consensus became that only the more specific WikiProject tags should be added. So yes, based on that I would say that WP Christianity should not tag talk pages already tagged by WP:Catholicism or WP:Anglicanism. Consider that if all WikiProjects would tag all articles within their scope then many talk pages would have a very long list of WikiProject tags, and root WikiProjects like WikiProject Science would have to tag a big part of Wikipedia.
I don't know if tagging only with the more specific WikiProjects is still the view of most editors so therefore I recommend that you investigate that matter, that is ask a number of editors what they think to form a new consensus. Or find some page where this is already being discussed. I even think it is likely that the new consensus will be in your favour so I think you will find it worth your time to investigate it.
And remember that WikiProjects are just like categories, they can not always be arranged in a hierarchical tree fashion. For instance WikiProject Cryptography "belongs" under several other unrelated WikiProjects such as WikiProject Computer science, WikiProject Mathematics, WikiProject Telecommunications and probably some war and spy related WikiProject that I don't know the name of.
And another thing: At Wikipedia your bot is not considered to be you, instead it is considered to be a dangerous monster that can damage many pages if you the bot owner does not control it properly. So we tie the monster up immediately at the slightest sign of danger until the bot owner have trained it properly. That is no criticism of the bot owner, that is just how things are with dangerous monsters.
So, good luck with your bot wrangling!
--David Göthberg (talk) 02:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
It has been already agreed upon the bot will not tag further on this project or related unless there is a consensus -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 02:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
As per the Discussion here, It is evident that the consensus of the Wikipedia community is that WikiProjects need NOT ask/get prior approval from any other WikiProjects (Descendant / Related / Any) for tagging articles in their scope and if it overlaps with any other project. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Computer/Information Security?

I can't seem to find a computer or information security task force. If one doesn't exist, I'd be willing to create one. I normally do Wikipedia for fun, since Computer Security is my day job, but I started fixing a few things a couple of days ago, and realized how much work was really needed in this area. Jclemens (talk) 21:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Please go ahead making one...I will also be happy to join ..What is the name you want to suggest ?
I propose one of the following :-
  • Computer and Network Security ?
  • Computer and Information Security ?

Thoughts ?? -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 07:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Either one would work. I think I prefer the latter as a bit more inclusive. I'll try and write up a bit more about what I think a scope statement ought to be, for your review. Jclemens (talk) 14:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Thatz gr8... You can start building Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing/Computer and Information Security task force page... I will post a proposal at the Wikiproject Council. You need to also identify the categories within the scope. Once you are done, I will create the WP 1.0 Assessment categories and the parameters to the project banner -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 02:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I have made the proposal here -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 07:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Here's a series of in-scope topics:

  • Computer security concepts, methods, and devices. Firewalls, for instance.
  • Computer security historical events that received appropriate RS/N coverage--Morris worm, Code Red, etc.
  • Computer security formal models, frameworks, standards, and legislation: ISO 17799, TCSEC, etc.
  • Computer security practitioners, like Marcus J. Ranum which I authored.
  • Computer security professional organizations, certifications, journals/magazines, etc.

Overall, I'd say that's a pretty impressive scope for the task force. Personally, I think I'm most interested in working on additional bio articles on major practitioners. Some (e.g. Dan Geer) exist but have poor and spotty coverage. Jclemens (talk) 08:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we identify the existing article categories also ? -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 08:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Category:Computer security is something to start with .. Be sure not to step into Category:Cryptography or people from WP:CRYPTO will complain like below -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 08:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Jclemens , for creating the task force pages. I have created the WP1.0 category tree for the task force.

The banner to be used is
{{WikiProject Computing|class=|importance=|security=yes|security-importance=}}
I have also started Computer Hardware task force -- Tinu Cherian - 13:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I removed the template from your comment so it doesn't categorize this page. --h2g2bob (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC)