Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing/Archive 14

At Talk:Julian Assange#Mubarak closing mobile services there is a discussion about According to Andrew O'Hagan, during the 2011 Egyptian revolution when Mubarak tried to close the mobile phone networks, Assange and others at WikiLeaks "hacked into Nortel and fought against Mubarak’s official hackers to reverse the process".^[1][2]". This is supported by a reliable source but no independant source has been found saying any hacking by anyone happened. I think the author probably confused the then current situation with something about Assange in 1991. Report: Egypt Shut Down Net With Big Switch, Not Phone Calls gives a timeline. Do you think what is described sounds reasonable or is extraordinary? If extraordinary then an independent source is required. NadVolum (talk) 10:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Context and quotes

O'Hagan said At the time of the Egyptian uprising, Mubarak tried to close down the country’s mobile phone network, a service that came through Canada. Julian and his gang hacked into Nortel and fought against Mubarak’s official hackers to reverse the process. The revolution continued and Julian was satisfied, sitting back in our remote kitchen eating chocolates. Some RSes quote and attribute this

and During my time with Assange there was a moment, it was during the uprising in Cairo, and it became obvious to Mubarak, the leader there, only too late that the revolution was essentially being organized by Blackberries, by social media, and by people fully in connection on their phones. So he closed down the Internet in the country, and I have to give him credit for it. It was an amazing thing to watch. It was new to the novel, new to the cinema, new to any sort of reportage that I’d ever encountered, was that five young people, young hackers in this house, me leaning my back against this typical English Aga, as they went to war from this house with Mubarak’s official hackers, going through the portals of a Canadian telecommunications supplier and fighting them in those dark corridors and finally beating them. said live

Timeline shows intelligence service continues to shut down remaining ISPs until they restored it, so shut down never finished

Related talk Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#What_to_do_when_a_reliable_source_says_something_but_no_evidence_and_it_seems_very_unlikely? Softlem (talk) 11:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

See ISP for what they do, an ISP connects a user to the internet. If an ISP can't connect to the world wide web then it can only provide a very limited service to its customers including voice and SMS. The Ramses exchange connected the ISPs to each other and the world wide web and was shut down. The mobile phone voice service was mostly closed down but then allowed to operate again after one day. Analog landlines were not affected by the shutdown. What a portal of a telecoms equipment manufacturer in Canada can do in such circumstances I haven't the foggiest idea and I'd be frankly amazed if Egyptian intelligence officers bothered hacking it. Though I do know the Chinese hacked it to steal their manufacturing designs! NadVolum (talk) 12:20, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

If an ISP can't connect to the world wide web then it can only provide a very limited service And if a service that came through Canada was shut down in Canada then it would never reach Egypt

Please stay on topic. The mobile phone voice service was mostly closed down but then allowed to operate again after one day. Analog landlines were not affected by the shutdown. has nothing to do with what O'Hagan said since we found the second source where he says it was the internet, I thought it might be about calls but the second source sounds like I was wrong. What a portal of a telecoms equipment manufacturer in Canada Nortel did more than that they did telecom and wireline, optical, wireless networking and they bought companies that did too can do in such circumstances I haven't the foggiest idea and I'd be frankly amazed if Egyptian intelligence officers bothered hacking it. What you dont know doesnt help Though I do know the Chinese hacked it to steal their manufacturing designs! ^[relevant?]

I gave source quotes and links. Our opinions and OR dont matter. If you want the project to say something we should let them. If you want to argue, go to Talk:Julian_Assange#Mubarak_closing_mobile_services. Edtirs here know where to look Softlem (talk) 12:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Your "What you dont know doesn't help" is why I'm here. If people here can't figure out a way hacking in Canada can help when the internet in Egypt is switched off then it really is an extraordinary claim. We may all be ignorant and there is a way but it would still be an extraordinary claim. NadVolum (talk) 12:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Your "What you dont know doesn't help" is why I'm here. I know its why posted here, saying it again doesnt help

If people here can't figure out a way hacking in Canada can help when the internet in Egypt is switched off Please stop oversimplifying the timeline and what O'Hagan said

then it really is an extraordinary claim People here not being able to reverse solve something more than 10 years after without all the skill Assange had and information Wikileaks had then, more than we have, doesnt make it an extraordinary claim. If they say its impossible that going through the portals of a company that does telecom and wireline, optical, wireless networking and helped build Egypt's telecom infrastructure before, can help when Egypt's mobile phone network came through Canada and Egypt tried to shut it down then its probably an extraordinary claim

For now we should leave it for the people here Softlem (talk) 13:20, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

An alternative that Assange was telling him of his exploits in 1991 and he mixed it up with the current events in 2011 is altogether quite easily possible. NadVolum (talk) 10:04, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

The bit that probably is true is that the people with Assange cheered when the internet was switched back on after five days. But it is pretty obvious they played no part in that and "fighting them in those dark corridors and finally beating them" is a bullshit interpretation of what was happening by O'Hagan. Assange's team couldn't switch on the Ramses exchange and the ISPs did what the government told them to do. NadVolum (talk) 10:21, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

You wanted WikiProject opinions. Stop giving yours and telling them what to think and what is pretty obvious and what your WP:OR and WP:SPECULATION is Softlem (talk) 11:59, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

It was you who went on that it had to be impossible before it could be considered extraordinary - and then only probably extraordinary! Why are you so desperate to include this stupidity without even the tiniest corroboration and when some non-technical bloke like him could easily make the obvious mistake? NadVolum (talk) 12:48, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

It was you who said that people here had to explain it to you or it was extraordinary. Why are you so desperate to exclude something that has 6 or more sources it?

Im just asking you to not stop WP:BLUDGEONING and wait for someone here to reply and until then accept @HaeB told you Reliable sources do not owe you "evidence". You are a Wikipedia editor, not a judge in a criminal court case or a peer reviewer of submissions to a scientific journal.

If you want opinions from WikiProject stop bludgeoning and wait for them to reply. If you want to say you know better than the RS who saw it, find something new to say or wait for a question or get an RS to publish you so we can cite you Softlem (talk) 13:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Would you just stop with that six sources please. They all are just quoting Andrew O'Hagan, and attributing it to him. They are citations showing he said it, nothing else. There was no reason for any of them to have it fact checked. That is the sort of thing that makes me ask why are you so desperate to haveit in? NadVolum (talk) 15:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I said they all attribute it to him.

There was no reason for any of them to have it fact checked. You asked at Verifiability and HaeB said all these reliable sources have made a judgment about his statements

why are you so desperate to haveit in? You said you would support its inclusion if you actually believed there was some truth in it rather than O'Hagan mixing up things by mistake. Why are you so desperate to remove something you agree is DUE because of OR? You wanted this process and comments so let the process happen and wait for comments and assume good faith Softlem (talk) 16:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

As to my reasons it alleges Assange once again hacked Nortel like he did in 1991 and was convicted of. As far as I can see every single one of O'Hagan's statements about it has big problems. I don't think it is right to reproduce an allegation of a crime with such unlikely evidence without any backup. Especially when he could easily have mixed it up with 1991. Just about anything besides another quote of what Andrew O'Hagen said is all I'm asking for, for instance that Nortel really did control part of the mobile phone service or its systems were hacked or some evidence of hacking in Egypt during the shutdown or some explanation of how he could actually do anything in Egypt. I don't require evidence Assange restored the internet after defeating Mubarak's hackers like Andrew says. What are your reasons for wanting it in? NadVolum (talk) 16:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

What are your reasons for wanting it in? Its DUE like you said and an RS saw it and like HaeB said reliable sources have made a judgment about his statements and no one denied it Softlem (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Those reliable sources are just others copying what O'Hagan said and saying he said it. They're not independent sources and they're not even in the least interested if it is true or not, they're just doing things like advertising his book. You just shouldn't do that, it's wrong. I'm finding it hard to assume good faith on youtr part. NadVolum (talk) 01:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Anyway I'm abandoning this. It is obvious nobody on this project is going to respond and I'm not going to find people with relevant experience elsewhere to give an opinion. I'm sorry it is so easy for rubbish to be stuck into Wikipedia. NadVolum (talk) 08:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Here canvassing in an attempt to get more discussion for a topic I started at RSN related to the publication cmswire.com. Since the source is pertinent to this project and used on a lot of pages that fall under this project, would hope someone can weight in on the discussion. CNMall41 (talk) 04:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

See Talk:Razer Inc.#"American-Singaporean" where I questioned whether Razer is best described as an 'American-Singaporean' company. Cfsprt (talk) 14:49, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I have nominated Digital media use and mental health for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:02, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello there! I'm stopping by because I have a COI and need an independent editor to review some changes I'm proposing to the NerdWallet article's Products and services section. This WikiProject is listed on the NerdWallet Talk page, so I figured someone here might be willing to help out.

If you follow this link to the NW Talk page, you'll see that I had been talking to an independent editor about these changes, but they dropped off the thread. I've tried reaching out to them once already, but I don't want to be a pest. I'm wary of making demands on volunteer editors' time. If someone here could pick up where that other editor left off, I would deeply appreciate it. I'm available for any questions you may have. Thanks! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 18:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Null (SQL) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Voice over LTE#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Forth (programming language) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:14, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am working on creating a new WikiProject, and I am looking for others to join in the creation of WikiProject Operating systems. If you'd be interested in joining and supporting the project, add your name to the proposal support list here. Thanks! OnlyNano 20:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I applaud your enthusiasm, but I fear this new project will be too small to survive in the long term. In any case, I will continue to work on computer history related subjects (if I find the time...), so I will help your WikiProject indirectly. Pavlor (talk) 06:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

That would be great, thank you! OnlyNano 16:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Internet Relay Chat#Requested move 29 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see proposal at: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Make Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science/Manual of style into Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Computer science.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  10:13, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

The article Global Diplomacy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The article about a computer game lacks sources and seemingly lacks notability per the advice at WP:NVG. The linked webpages are also dead, indicating no continued relevance. One alternative would be to merge with Email Games, the game's publisher, but there is no such article.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. - - mathmitch7 ^{(talk/contribs)} 23:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I added this game to List of play-by-mail games, using the archived sources on the PROD'ded page, and redirected there. Felix QW (talk) 08:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I've submitted a draft article on converged databases for review. I'm requesting that someone review it and approve it if it's acceptable. Thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Converged_database KLR422 (talk) 00:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Accepted. Thanks for the contribution. ~Kvng (talk) 14:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm very appreciative and proud to make a contribution. KLR422 (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I've started a discussion about how to handle these seemingly overlapping articles. Input appreciated. —DIYeditor (talk) 11:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Artificial intelligence art/Archive 1#Requested move 28 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Digraphs and trigraphs#Requested move 2 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Remsense诉 02:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

There's a dispute at MP4 file format about its status as an open file format, and since we've reached the limit of the three-revert rule, I would like to ask for opinions at its talk page. Fernando Trebien (talk) 15:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

A related discussion is now also going on at Open file format § Open formats require an open licence?. --Fernando Trebien (talk) 19:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:TACL#Requested move 12 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Brusquedandelion (talk) 01:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, This article could use the input of a knowledgable editor (i.e., not me...) --Randykitty (talk) 14:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § AI for WP guidelines/ policies. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested merger discussion at Talk:List of fictional computers#Merger proposal 18 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Dash77 (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Surface Pro (2017)#Requested move 11 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Lightoil (talk) 10:37, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Project Harmony (FOSS group)#Requested move 22 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. asilvering (talk) 22:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I am seeking guidance on the appropriateness and any suggestions for improvement/editing on the following proposed section: Talk:LiveJasmin#Latest_proposed_"Controversy"_section_after_a_number_of_suggestions Alexfotios (talk) 16:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I've been looking at Base address which is currently an unref page. I'm not clear if the references I'm seeing are referring to the same thing, I was hoping someone here could perhaps improve the page? Thanks. JMWt (talk) 08:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Computer simulation#Requested move 2 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Jason Baumgartner#Requested move 16 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Synchronous conferencing#Requested move 25 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 18:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:CounterSpy (software)#Requested move 27 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:59, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested merger discussion at Talk:Online chat#Merge to Synchronous conferencing and move usable content to various articles that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 18:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if anyone here could take a look at my edit request on Talk:Cyberattack ? TIA Buidhe paid (talk) 23:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Technology#Pictures of eponyms of graphics processor microarchitectures for a discussion on whether Nvidia graphics microarchitecture articles should have pictures of the people they are named after. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Small form factor (desktop and motherboard)#Requested move 3 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —Alalch E. 11:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

COBOL has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Internet Information Services#Requested move 17 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I have nominated PowerBook 100 for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. George Ho (talk) 08:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I have submitted previously draftified SurrealDB for inclusion into mainspace. Please join the discussion on it's talk page. Mr Vili talk 06:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I have specified a software methodology call FOO (Function-Oriented with Objects). The methodology mainly relates to avoiding use of v-tables and the hidden "this" pointer in programming practice. The FOO methodology does allow use of data objects and pure functional interfaces as long as the objects meet the aforementioned criteria. You may learn more at https://www.codepages.net/ and selecting the "Use FOO" menu item. I am happy to discuss and further describe about FOO. An additional important aspect of FOO is performance of software with GPU and I can provide reference information about that also. (My background: I am a degreed and experienced [over 25 yrs] software engineer working for corporations. FOO is important not only for coding reasons, for example see this article about problems with OO https://engineering.purdue.edu/tgrogers/papers/zhang.asplos2021.pdf)

After I had created a first draft of the FOO article and Mujinga and I discussed it, we both agree that, because I am the author of the "FOO" methodology, that if someone is interested in writing the article, that may work better for establishing the article on Wikipedia. The draft of the article is on the my homepage here.

Thank You Gregory McPherran

Engineer-1024 (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Twitter under Elon Musk#Requested move 24 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Web-julio (talk) 00:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm here as a representative of Fastly, an edge computing and content delivery company. I was wondering if anyone at this WikiProject would be interested in handling an edit request I've put forward that seeks to improve the Fastly article's Operation section. The section as it currently exists is light on good citations. My draft tries to fix that issue and adds some information about how the company's products and services have expanded over the past few years.

If this sounds interesting to anybody, please use this link to view my edit request. If you think the draft can be improved in any way, just leave a message on the Talk page and I'll do my best to accommodate your feedback. Thanks! Jagger at Fastly (talk) 06:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

The article Service-oriented distributed applications has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Poorly explained and jargony article that seems like the topic is better covered in other related articles like Service-oriented architecture, but that might be because I don't understand the topic that well.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gnisacc (talk) 00:38, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Unified Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics (Unicode block)#Requested move 14 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ideographic Description Characters (Unicode block)#Requested move 14 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ideographic Description Characters (Unicode block)#Requested move 14 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kaspersky bans and allegations of Russian government ties#Requested move 23 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ecolego#Requested move 6 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Open file format has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

MP4 file format has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

ISO base media file format has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Reeves AN/MSQ-77 Bomb Directing Central#Requested move 16 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans 12:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 20:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Neuromorphic engineering#Requested move 24 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Twitter#Requested move 25 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Web-julio (talk) 17:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Brazilian investigation into Elon Musk#Requested move 1 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Web-julio (talk) 03:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Arrest of Pavel Durov#Requested move 28 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 05:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey everyone, comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Peer review/IMac G4/archive1. Would appreciate technical and non-techy eyes on it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 11:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wi-Fi 6#Requested move 29 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Oracle Cerner#Requested move 19 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 03:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Lebanon pager explosions#Requested move 19 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Web-julio (talk) 03:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I am studying the foresaid computer and fixing part of the information in the article. Wikipedia is not a primary source, therefore I am updating data in my website, then updating the wikipedia article. While I cannot leave the wrong data at place, I am facing a moral dilemma on wether I should be updating it if I am also one of the sources.

For this reason I would like to ask a revision on the foresaid article by somebody else that is not me who could also be critic of my own work. I am open to suggestions and questions.

Also, I am facing the language barrier for the other wikipedias that still display the wrong information. Could anybody help me, please?

Thank you in advance and sorry for the trouble.

Buran Biggest Fan (talk) 12:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I not sure I see a WP:COI here. However, it does not smell right to use your own site as a citation for improvements you make. You must have gotten your information from somewhere else; can you cite that? If you feel you can't make corrections, consider using {{Dubious}} and talk page discussion to help other editors help you. Admittedly it is a niche topic and help may not be immediately forthcoming but there have been 35 contributors to the article over its 20-year existence. ~Kvng (talk) 16:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I am boosting an edit request for Template:WikiProject Computing to add the rest of the descendant wikiprojects as parameters to the main template. A list of missing projects is collected there.

Consensus is needed. Tule-hog (talk) 05:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

15.ai has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested merge discussion at Talk:BitTorrent#Requested merge 30 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Sceeegt (talk) 19:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi all,

I'm in the process of rewriting Information Security and could do with someone looking over my shoulder/helping clear out some of the general fluff. All welcome. Joe (talk) 15:38, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

History of programming languages is pegged as a "list class" article. It has a lot of lists in it but it also has a lot of text. Do you think this categorization is appropriate? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I've updated the rating to C class. ~Kvng (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Meta Platforms#Requested move 29 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 21:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Computing/sidebar#recent_Computing-related_changes and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Computing/Archive_13#Project_watchlist (courtesy ping to DFlhb), I propose appending the target of /Recent changes to the home page's article alerts, similar to WP:COMPSEC.

Here is a preview (styling sourced from COMPSEC):

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:.zip (top-level domain)#Requested move 19 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 03:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Identity management#Requested move 12 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Gapo#Requested move 10 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:CloudPets#Requested move 18 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Gateway, Inc.#Requested move 20 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Is anybody interested in making spoken Wikipedia audios at scale? I think it could up to double Wikipedia reads and that many readers would be interested in these: most people don't like to read long articles as texts on screens but millions frequently listen to podcasts.

I increasingly find myself listening to these audios instead of to podcasts or audiobooks as Wikipedia covers more interesting things, things fitting better to my interests or needs, covers things better than podcasts (e.g. more neutral, accurate & critical), and is more succinct than overly long audiobooks.

Here is the process to create these as far as I developed it and it could already be used to e.g. fulfill all audio requests. I think most people don't scroll below the large References section to the External links section and the current audio player is outdated with a way too narrow width and without a button to jump back x seconds. Let me know if you have questions. I don't know if there's a better place to ask about this so if there is, please also let me know, thanks!

Prototyperspective (talk) 17:33, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I suggest we can maximize the impact of this effort by working popular pages first. ~Kvng (talk) 15:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks. Currently, it's more about first maximizing participation I think but making popular pages available probably also helps with that. I thought of creating audios for these next so I'd create audios for a mix of these two kinds of articles and the ones I had already planned earlier the next time I get to it. I also thought about enabling people to request audios on the WikiProject page. I think audios are most useful for 1. lengthy articles that are interesting but not so nice to read on a screen (like the example above) 2. articles about topics that are well podcastable/audiobookable like 'History of xyz'-articles.
Several of those popular pages are already available as audio, e.g. Internet Archive & Artificial intelligence. Developing the process further would probably be most useful, e.g. to make it automatically replace abbreviations with their written out form (like e.g. to for example or M to million) or remove the periods after name initials (like J. K. Rowling to J K Rowling) which results in long pauses which then need to be fixed at some point with a reupload if only noticed afterwards. Issues with audios can be reported using this template. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

• ChatGPT
• Wiki
• Artificial intelligence
• History of wikis

By the way I added audios for many of those popular pages by now. However, they or many of them are not particularly well suited for the audio format like the examples in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia spoken by AI voice. If the article is long (ie too long to read) and you're interested in the particular subject they can still be interesting; and of course visually impaired people would also benefit from these. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

In 2023 , this article turned from a general topic to a business topic; and from a non-AI topic to an AI-topic. This seems odd, as the article already describes non-business uses; and uses that are not-AI based. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Double-precision floating-point format § Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2024. – Anne drew (talk · contribs) 21:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi WikiProject Computing Editors,

I wonder if any editors would be interested in reviewing our suggestions for the Tencent Cloud page? I'm on Wikipedia on behalf of Tencent hence we have only made suggestions via it's Talk page, but have not heard back for 3 weeks (we're aware it's holiday season!).

Your help would be appreciated!

Best,

Yeran TencentCommsYeran (talk) 04:34, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

MacBook (2006–2012) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 23:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Could someone with knowledge weigh in on an editor's Jan 7-8th edits on Locomotive BASIC? I'm out of my element, but it's very confusing how the article is called Locomotive Basic, but seems to (from this editor's changes) to now have a main focus on Amstrad and barely mentions Locomotive. Either they are content forking/hijacking the article, or the article needs moving. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

The article Village Area Network has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced and unimproved 15 years. Tagged for notability for 10 years.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 05:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Steam (service) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 14:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

This article has been unsourced for almost 15 years. Our options are:

1. Find and add reliable sources; or
2. Merge with a relevant article; or
3. Go to WP:AfD.

Bearian (talk) 21:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:NOTCLEANUP. Please do a Scholar and Books search before taking this to WP:AFD. It appears to be a notable topic. ~Kvng (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Category:Virtual reality pioneers has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:56, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Itanium has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 20:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Here is another stub, unsourced for 15 years. Please help to source this. Bearian (talk) 04:33, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Here's another stub for you and your Project to source! Bearian (talk) 11:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Thus stub is rated as less important, but seems like it should be rated higher. It's been unsourced for 15 years, part of a backlog of similar things. Can someone please source this? Bearian (talk) 00:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

There was an unofficial merge proposal that did not reach consensus or take action. Bumping here. Tule-hog (talk) 17:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Re recent deletions at programming language and discussion at User talk:Theaceofthespade#Computer science. More eyes appreciated, as this is going nowhere otherwise. @Theaceofthespade: Andy Dingley (talk) 22:49, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

I would love more eyes on this as well, but there is a much larger discussion, and this is not actually some petty thing about whether or not HTML is a programming language - it's about whether or not the article should discuss the perspectives that do/don't see it that way due to the differences between formal and informal definitions.

If you're interested in this topic, please see my proposal here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Programming_language#Definitions_Section

in regard to a more complete explanation behind how I believe this section should be handled. Theaceofthespade (talk) 18:15, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I was patrolling pages for potential deletion and I came across Adaptive coding. The article is in need of some subject-expert cleanup and needs citations to sources, but it seems to me that the topic warrants an article. I didn't know if it belongs here or at wp:WikiProject Mathematics so I apologize if this is the wrong place, but it would be great if anyone is able to help save the article. -- Lenny Marks (talk) 18:56, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I've come across Category:Actor model (computer science), which appears to have significant overlap between its articles, including a few that have been imported to wikibooks. This was raised at Talk:Actor model and process calculi#Merge this article? way back in 2012 but didn't get any attention. I don't know anything about the topic, so I figured someone here might be able to determine what can be done with these. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:13, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

This could really use TLC. It's been unsourced for 15 years. Please add reliable sources and add more information. Bearian (talk) 12:00, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:History of Ruby § Blanking and redirecting. Gracen (they/them) 20:40, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Situation 1: currently, Wikipedia has an article about Large Language Models and a separate list of large language models. But what about reflective models? Should we create a general article about reflection in models along with a separate article listing reflective (reasoning?) models, including details about individual implementations, benchmarks, etc? This solution feels somewhat cumbersome.

Situation 2: there's an article about Intelligent Agents, but does it need a companion list of specific intelligent agents? So far, I've found only the article on the OpenAI Operator, but there seem to be no articles covering agents such as Claude Computer Use and Runner H. I see an article about Manus, but I had to search for it.TheTeslak (talk) 04:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Can it be done? We can decide either Compsci or Computing is a better term. The both serve the same purpose. VectorVoyager (talk) 10:49, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

It'd counter propose renaming WP Computing to WP Information Technology, for better differentiation. fgnievinski (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be more "verbose" from an utilitarian point of view? Project name being shorter and easier is better for people to find it out and understand what it is. VectorVoyager (talk) 12:58, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Also, do we need to further differentiate rather than uniting the two? Uniting both those wikiprojects under a simple title would be better. We would be bigger and better organized, like other big wikiprojects. VectorVoyager (talk) 13:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

It could be titled WikiProject "IT", but I don't think smallness is so important. WP CS could be merged into WikiProject Science and WP Computing could be merged into WikiProject Technology, but I don't think fewer projects is necessarily better, either. What we actually need is for wikiprojects to be titled consistently with the Wikipedia articles they are named after. If you check Computing, its scope is much narrower than that of WP Computing. fgnievinski (talk) 03:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

I get your point but computer science and computing are more or less the same thing. And both of them, despite being ultra important, are loosely organized and not much active. I wanna organize one, but having those 2 makes it difficult to choose. One gotta merge with the other. VectorVoyager (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

I double checked Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing/Scope and Goals and computer science is, indeed, already included in WP Computing. So, I'd be in favor of making WP CS a task force of WP Computing. fgnievinski (talk) 20:47, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

We have a number of computing-related wikiprojects already under Computing's unbrella to some extent or another: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer security, Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet, Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing/Computer networking task force, Wikipedia:WikiProject Software, Wikipedia:WikiProject Software/Free and open-source software task force. Computing serves as a critical mass for work in these areas. I don't think any merging or systemic reorganization is necessary. It might be a good idea to write or improve scope statements for each of these projects or task forces. ~Kvng (talk) 19:47, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Any WikiProject which becomes dormant is subject to be demoted into a task force of an active WikiProject. fgnievinski (talk) 20:48, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

@Kvng: Hmmm, but those ones specialize on those topics, whereas both Computing and Computer Science have umbrella scopes that include them. VectorVoyager (talk) 08:49, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

@VectorVoyager you may be correct in that observation. I'm not going to blanket oppose any specific reorganization proposal. I think the current organization is good enough and I don't see adjustments making an improvement in how we conduct our work. ~Kvng (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Aakash (tablet)#Requested move 25 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello editors,

I noticed that the Rackspace Technology article is of "interest" to this Wikiproject, so I wanted to alert editors to two outstanding requests on the Talk page.

The first request is about the company's founding history and the second request is about the company history in the 2000s.

If there are any questions, I will be over on the Talk page of the article. Thanks! Nicholas for Arsenal Group (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Cyberwarfare by China#Requested move 16 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 09:25, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Timeline of Microsoft Windows and Timeline of Microsoft Windows releases currently target different articles. At Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 25#Timeline of Microsoft Windows it has been proposed they should lead to the same place but the discussion needs input. Please contribute your thoughts there. Thryduulf (talk) 01:25, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Quantum supremacy#Revisiting move to "Quantum Advantage" that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Disney+ Hotstar#Requested move 29 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Please see discussion at Wikipedia talk:Computer science#Please beware of Calliper Callip possibly under other names, accounts or IP addresses for a discussion of user who expresses the intent to introduce misinformation to technology articles. —DIYeditor (talk) 22:14, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi all, my name is Burcu and I work for Gartner. I've been working with editors to update the Gartner article page. I have two requests posted on the Gartner Talk page that I'm hoping editors here interested in industry history could take a look at. Any feedback would be very much appreciated. BurcuAtGartner (talk) 18:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Could someone from this WikiProject take a look at Qodo and assess it? -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:34, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

 Done Start class ~Kvng (talk) 17:39, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:16-pin 12VHPWR connector#Requested move 18 April 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 16:31, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Would anyone here like to adopt Computer configuration? It is currently a stub, mainly h/w but some s/w (system settings redirects there). Maybe a broad concept article is as much as is needed? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 23:19, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Fastra II has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 04:16, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

NorthernWinds (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Max (streaming service)#Requested move 24 May 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 00:50, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello again,

Would this also be a good place to suggest an article on the MLPerf benchmarks ( https://mlcommons.org/benchmarks )? I don't think I'm familiar enough to write it myself, but I'd be happy to help. 2607:F2C0:B199:F700:4D70:201C:3E15:980E (talk) 10:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, One of the reviewers of a draft article about Untether AI that I have published (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Untether_AI) suggested I post a request for help here. Would anyone have some suggestions as to how to improve the article, particularly its notability? Any feedback would be very much appreciated. Rhg2 (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Notability is an issue that cannot necessarily be resolved by making the draft better. Establishing notability requires finding good sources. For some subjects, such sources simply don't exist and an article on such a subject cannot be written until others publish WP:SECONDARY information about the subject. Since the company you're writing about is defunct, it is less likely new sources will ever be published. Furthermore, establishing notability can be an especially difficult problem for companies as notability requirements for companies are particularly demanding. ~Kvng (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

There's ongoing dispute in edit summaries and a user talk page over adding V (Vlang) and Pony to the lists of implementations in various articles: Hash table, Type aliasing, Snake case, Mixin and more. There are additions to quite short lists, e.g. adding V to the eight implementations in Hash Table or to Java, Javascript, Swift and Fortran 90 as a language using the underscore as a Decimal separator, and to quite long ones. Could editors discuss here whether V and Pony are significant enough to be mentioned in such articles? NebY (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

These are very little known languages with tiny usage shares (significantly less than one percent). Adding content about these languages across Wikipedia is not helpful to the readers at all and mainly serves to inappropriately promote these obscure languages. MrOllie (talk) 17:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

The "little known" argument looks false, because inclusion can be for academic reasons and to provide a diverse spectrum of information or examples for different kinds of languages, and it can be said that Pony falls under this umbrella. Particularly because of numerous academic papers on it and the famous computer scientists involved. Even under the argument that a language "must" be as generally popular as those listed on the articles in question, V arguably meets that criteria. Being ranked above various languages on TIOBE or above them in popularity lists for GitHub (top 10 in the year to year).

V is around as or more popular than Nim, Zig, D, Ocaml, Haxe, Racket, and Elixir. Languages that were included in the articles. In fact, no reverts, protests, or bans were pursued or applied involving those other mentioned languages. No arguments as to their significance, suitability, or questions about how well known they are were aggressively pursued or asked.

Furthermore, the sudden introduction of new special criteria (beyond the standard of notability and having a Wikipedia page) to aggressively block specific programming languages or other editors, gives the appearance of being a diversion to fairness. One in which can hide bias, the creation of de facto ownership for only select editors, or allowing only what is on their personal approved list. True, there is the opposite or various views. But, it can be argued we're given the equivalent result, of a kind of topic wide de facto ban.

If the counter is that is not the case, then logic tells us that such specified criteria should been previously and is applied to all languages, equally and fairly, across all programming related articles and content. An editor who attempted to add "lesser known than the others" languages to what existed, such as Zig or Haxe (it and others are not even on TIOBE), should have been equally scrutinized, reverted, or gotten requests for opinions on them. Not to mention the timeline of when opinions are requested, after already implementing and enforcing abrasive reverts and actions. Wukuendo (talk) 03:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

That someone has not fixed all problems or removed all unduly weighted content across Wikipedia does not mean that they cannot object to your newly added undue content. MrOllie (talk) 02:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Somehow, "lesser" or "as well known" languages such as Nim, Haxe, Zig, D, Ocaml, Elixir... represent peak "dueness", while it just so happens that specifically V and/or Pony do not? That includes ignoring the factual presentation of data from neutral 3rd parties about V's comparable popularity. Even more, upon the discovery of the presence of Pony and V, all other languages on those articles were ignored or deemed acceptable enough not to question. This was allowed for years (and continues to be), until the day Pony or V showed up, and only then was just those specifically handled. Wukuendo (talk) 10:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

You seem to be doing well arguing with that straw man, but it bears little resemblance to what anyone else has commented. MrOllie (talk) 03:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

(1) This situation was forced by the abrasive implementation of what can be seen as a de facto ban on specific languages and articles. Arguably, few want any part in tangling with that kind of Wikipedia stress or intimidation, nor are they likely to be as concerned about the handling of various programming languages. As I was specifically the recipient of repeated aggressive actions and invited to discuss over here, so I came. (2) It's not a straw man that neutral 3rd party data (TIOBE and GitHub) shows V as verifiably as popular or as well known as languages on the articles in question. (3) The inclusion of notable languages with already existing Wikipedia pages (like Pony), particularly those with significant academic papers and coverage, to give a more diverse spectrum of examples on programming related articles was rarely an issue until being recently made so. Wukuendo (talk) 05:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

We always needs more than the mere existence of a Wikipedia page on someone/thing to justify inclusion elsewhere. We don't list an actor on every page about a film or show they appeared in, every genre writer in an article about that genre, or every destination served in a rail station article. Exhaustive, indiscriminate lists are discouraged; we're looking for content that's significant for that article. WP:NOTDIRECTORY applies, as does the entire spirit of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (the enumerations in our policies are not exhaustive either).

The existence of other content doesn't establish that any such content can be included; WP:OTHERCONTENT illustrates some such arguments. Often we deal with issues as they arise; that doesn't require fixing all pre-existing issues first. If an article already has too much of something, that's no justification for making it worse.

The TIOBE ranking of V is not a good argument for V's inclusion in articles about Type aliasing or Hash tables; as our TIOBE index says, it is only calculated from the number of search engine results for queries containing the name of the language. As such, it's highly susceptible to spamming and SEO; its only virtue is that it must have been very easy to program but gives TIOBE publicity. Worse, "V" is a peculiar challenge to identify and TIOBE mark its result, as having only 80% confidence (which in hypothesis testing would be worthless). V's score of only 0.19% renders it almost indistinguishable from languages that didn't make the top-50. Pony doesn't feature.

Our Tiobe index article mentions two alternative indices. Neither V or Pony feature in the June 2024 Redmonk rankings or the IEEE Spectrum 2024 rankings.

V was first released in 2019. It remains in beta, now at version 0.4.10. According to its creator, "After 0.4 0.6, we'll be going for 1.0 right away, freezing the syntax, similar to what Go did. So if something has to be changed, now is the time to do it." That was in 2020. According to our article; V was created to develop a desktop messaging client named Volt; nothing else is mentioned.

According to Pony (programming language), after 10 years that's at 0.59.0.

Altogether, there's no sign that either V or Pony's choice of a decimal separator or inclusion of algebraic data types, for example, will be significant to our readers or otherwise worth mentioning. It's not Wikipedia's job to include products in fairness to them, and it's unsurprising that adding V to so many articles raised questions. NebY (talk) 18:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Articles in question, to which V and/or Pony were added, include:

Algebraic data type, At sign, Bcrypt, Concurrency (computer science), Conditional (computer programming), Decimal separator, Exit (system call), Filter (higher-order function), Foreign function interface, Hash table, Increment and decrement operators, Interface (object-oriented programming), Mixin, Modular programming, NaCl (software), Printf, Project Verona, Range (computer programming), Result type, Self-hosting (compilers), Snake case, Ternary conditional operator and Type aliasing

They were also added to two list articles which begin with explicit "notable programming languages" criteria, List of programming languages and List of programming languages by type

and two which don't show explicit criteria, Generational list of programming languages and List of computing mascots, . NebY (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

(1) The claim that either V or Pony are in an excessive number of articles is arguably false.

Nim, Zig, Red, D, Ocaml, Haxe, Racket, and Elixir are "lesser known" languages included in such articles.

Examples of links to their pages:

• Zig's link count is at 169
• Nim's link count is 267
• Racket's link count is 320
• Haxe's link count is 461
• Elixir's link count is 473

Racket and Haxe, by the way, are not on TIOBE, Redmonk, or the IEEE lists. Nim is not on the IEEE list. This is pointed out, not as a knock on any of those languages (as don't support the advocated censoring), but rather there is not excessive wikilawyering or what some might call shadow tribunals, erected to force shadow bans on editors for mentioning them in programming related articles. The obsessiveness looks reflective of I just don't like it, to force what can be seen or allowed.

(2) One of many examples of what appears to be selective bias or the hypocritical application of de facto banning

On the Type aliasing article, same editor added the lesser known languages of Nim, Zig, Crystal, and Elixir. There was: no multiple reverting of the editor, no hounding of the editor all over Wikipedia, nor any application of additional special criteria for inclusion of these supposedly "lesser" languages.

(3) Using old rankings

The TIOBE and GitHub rankings are 2025 and current, not years old. They are industry recognized, famous, and neutral. There are critics of them, but there are also critics of Redmonk and IEEE as well. Furthermore, The programming landscape is not static, and more current monthly ratings are reflective of that. Their usage was to show that one of the languages in question, is arguably and comparatively well-known enough in relationship to others in the articles.

(4) "will be significant to our readers or otherwise worth mentioning"

The language being used strikes as strange. No specific editor of Wikipedia can position themselves to declare what readers would find significant or worthwhile to read. That is far too presumptuous.

(5) Wikipedia wide diverting of editors

The article specific discussions among editors, which arguably should be taking place and were how things were done, looked to be rerouted to here. For what can be argued as a kind of shadow tribunal over if Pony or V are allowed to ever be mentioned. That looks at least inappropriate, if not arguably trying to get a shadow tribunal rubber stamp for bullying. It's confusing as to what is actually trying to be accomplished. "These languages have been found guilty of not being significant enough". "Therefore, no mention of them shall ever be allowed again on Wikipedia".

If that is not the case, looks like specifics over inclusion, should be handled at the individual article level. There would be less of the appearance of impropriety directed at a specific language or editor. Wukuendo (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Please do not accuse fellow editors of hypocrisy, censorship, bullying, obsessiveness, wikilawyering and the rest - see our policy pages Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Considering our readers is not presumptuous. The most recent rankings of Redmonk and IEEE Spectrum are not years old, and are not old in terms of the lifetimes of V and Pony, first released abou six and ten years ago. We are dealing here with the multiple insertions of two languages still in beta and hardly used, V and Pony (e.g. Java, JavaScript, Julia, Swift, V (Vlang)[41], and free-form Fortran 90 use the underscore (_) character for this purpose.), not pre-existing problems in some articles. NebY (talk) 09:50, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

(1) "our readers"

They are not your or mine readers. Wikipedia articles are for the public. All editors of them are equal and should receive equal treatment. Discriminatory practices against editors, based on bias or hypocrisy, is not consistent with any stated policy.

(2) Observation of article state, exclusion practices, or use of analogy

To show there is a de facto ban being executed, unequal application of special criteria created to exclude certain languages, or pointing out the hypocrisy in justifications for such de facto bans are allowed descriptions of behavior and the factual state of the articles in question.

Factual evidence is then presented to back up those assertions and analogies are used to illustrate the logic of what is being done. It would be no different than saying, "X is being blocked by Y". That is either the case or not, the statement in itself or analogies of it, is not accusatory. Facts do exist. Analogies can be used to illustrate points.

(3) Presenting old rankings and ignoring or excluding newer and famous industry standard rankings

TIOBE is the most famous industry recognized rankings for programming languages. More so than Redmonk or IEEE. Redmonk's StackOverflow usage is very problematic. StackOverflow is a forum, with anonymous accounts, which is often characterized as dying and known for creating a toxic atmosphere. Many programmers seldom to never use their forum, instead going to language specific sites or using AI (also why year matters). Additionally, certain languages are more difficult to understand, so generate more questions. By comparison, GitHub's place is without doubt, as is: famous, industry recognized, validated data, and neutral.

Not only are the Redmonk and IEEE presenting out of date and old data, but the hypocrisy is made readily apparent, where numerous languages included in those articles are not on the Redmonk, IEEE, or even TIOBE.

Even beyond that point, of languages in those articles not being in top programming rankings, it has been demonstrated that the assertion of Pony or V are excessively listed is false as well. For example, the Hack programming language is neither on the old Redmonk and IEEE, nor TIOBE. It is linked to on Wikipedia 305 times.

(4) Hardly used in comparison to other languages listed

The assertion that V, is hardly used in comparison to other languages listed (Hack, Haxe, Red, Racket, Nim...) in those articles, is demonstrably false. This is what both TIOBE and GitHub lists show. The GitHub data, extends back to 2011, shows V as a top 11 to 10 repo for the last 5 years (year to year rankings). Being ranked above languages included in those pages, such as Elixir, Crystal, Nim, Ruby, Haxe, Racket, etc...

(5) Knowledge of programming languages and characterizing normal editing as if vandalism or nefarious

To add programming languages and references to them, in context to the subject, is the normal editing process. This can be clearly seen in all articles in question and should not be categorized or presented like it's vandalism.

Furthermore, various languages in those articles are also in beta. For example Zig (in beta), which is linked (see above) in far more articles (link count continues to increase), and without conflict or insinuating anything nefarious.Wukuendo (talk) 03:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Several articles (such as "Home computer" or "Commodore 64") claim that the Commodore 64 is some variation of the "highest-selling computer of all time". This claim seems highly-dubious to me, is almost-certainly outdated, and likely relies on using a definition of "computer" that conveniently excludes any potential counterexamples. While the sales figures of the C64 (estimated at somewhere between twelve-million and seventeen-million units) were no-doubt remarkable for the 1980s, in the decades since computers have become far more prevalent in society so this seems like a claim that is liable to becoming outdated quickly. I can't find any recent sales figures for individual models of the Macintosh, for example, but it would be highly-surprising to me if the M1 Macbook Air had sold fewer than twelve-million units, for example. Even beyond that, there is also the matter of the Playstation 2, which is unquestionably a computer (even if it arguably isn't the same kind of computer as the C64) and sold over 150-million units. To me these claims seem as if they either need to be removed from said articles or better placed into context, although I understand if sourcing is an issue with achieving the latter. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 14:07, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I removed one unsupported statement.

Commodore 64 makes a claim based on CNN reporting citing Guinness which is the sort of WP:SECONDARY sourcing we prefer. Here's what Guinness says. I agree that this is either unlikely to still be true or relies on an outdated definition of computer. Not sure where to go from here. ~Kvng (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

It seems that Guinness specify "best-selling desktop computer", which at the very least seems more plausible, although I'm still not convinced that these sources aren't outdated, and it seems to me as if any sales record claim is reliant on setting a fairly arbitrary definition regarding what is or isn't eligible. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Here's an even bigger claim by David John Pleasance, managing director of Commodore UK back then:

"There’s been a lot of conjecture about the volume of C64s sold worldwide. I can tell you categorically that the number was just a tad under 27 million. I can tell you that because, when we were thinking about doing a management buyout, we got access to all the figures."

From this article. -- 2804:D4B:790C:C500:44DA:1A49:9250:C118 (talk) 05:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

This stub needs more than 1 iffy source. Please add reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 23:35, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

This has been unsourced for 13 years. Please add reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 19:51, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Moore's law has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Pease help turn this into an article. Bearian (talk) 03:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete. It's just a WP:DICDEF. 2A00:23C5:E9AC:DA01:F580:F286:F4EA:C589 (talk) 16:17, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

It's been expanded and sourced. Bearian (talk) 11:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:GeForce GTX 10 series#Requested move 13 July 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 10:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a proposal to merge Computer-supported collaboration into Computer-supported cooperative work that has been open since January, and it could use some feedback. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 07:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Please explain this in layperson's terms and add reliable sources. Thank you in advance. Bearian (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

All these tags combined means that this needs major fixes, or deletion. Please discuss. Bearian (talk) 18:23, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Robert Adamson (software pioneer)#Requested move 8 August 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 09:15, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:MPEG-1 Audio Layer II#Requested move 3 August 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:25, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Floppy disk, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for determining the scope of the article. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a proposal to merge Small Form Factor Committee into Small Form-factor Pluggable that has seemingly stalled, and it could use some feedback.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Flat Display Mounting Interface#Requested move 8 August 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 10:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

An editor has requested that Rectifier (neural networks) be moved to Rectified linear unit, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. 174.138.218.72 (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I've posted a

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

request on the Talk:VP-Expert page regarding authorship attribution for Brian Sawyer. The request is narrowly scoped, supported by reliable independent sources, and formatted to comply with COI guidelines.

Would someone from this project be willing to take a look? Here's the direct link to the section:

Talk:VP-Expert#Request: Attribute authorship of VP-Expert

Thanks so much! — User:Bns1743 Bns1743 (talk) 16:21, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Is this annual meeting notable? If yes, then please add reliable sources. If not, then please suggest either a deletion or some specific alternative. Thank you in advance. Bearian (talk) 15:41, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

The article Jazz DSP has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as Unreferenced for 9 years. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. The Hungarian language article has been redirected. This page has two spam links.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 07:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

The pages Emoji, List of Emojis, and List of Unicode Characters all need to be updated to have the correct counts of characters and emoji following the release of Unicode 17.0 and Emoji 17.0. I have already edited the Template for List of Emojis emoji table, but I'm not very technically-orientated and cannot decipher the proper count of characters on Unicode's informative text files, so if any other editor could undertake this that would be super. I've also asked this on other talk pages so someone else may have made a change already. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^blather 21:38, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

The user Drmccreedy has now made the changes, the problem is solved. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^blather 20:43, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I've submitted a Redirect Review for Colin McCormack (computer programmer), which was redirected to Minix despite clear evidence that McCormack's contributions were unrelated to the core Minix project and instead involved a unique hardware port to the Applix 1616. The draft article has been restored with full sourcing here: User:Sparks_Eleventy/Colin McCormack draft.

If any editors involved with WikiProject Computing would like to provide feedback or support at the Redirect Review discussion, it would be appreciated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion

Update: The article has now been submitted to Articles for Creation for review, following guidance from another editor. You can view the current draft here: Colin McCormack draft. Input or suggestions are still very welcome.

Thanks! Sparks Eleventy (talk) 03:49, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello WikiProject Computing,

I have a conflict of interest as the author of VP-Expert, so I cannot edit the article directly. I’ve posted a {{request edit}} on the article talk page asking for a very narrow, well-sourced addition documenting VP-Expert’s market position, using a reliable secondary source from InfoWorld.

Here’s the proposed addition for quick reference:

VP-Expert was widely adopted during the late 1980s. By December 1989, InfoWorld described it as "the best-selling expert-system software for personal computers."[1]

Would an uninvolved editor be willing to review and, if appropriate, implement this? Talk page request: Talk:VP-Expert#COI_Request:_Add_Secondary_Source_to_Document_Market_Position

Thank you very much!

-- Bns1743 (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2025 (UTC) Bns1743 (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi — I’ve submitted Draft:List of applications built with VP-Expert for review. Sharing here in case any project members are interested in taking a look.

Thanks! — Bns1743 (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

The article Brace notation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as Unreferenced for almost 16 years. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. Notability tagged for 2 months.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

This stub has been unsourced for 15 years and is tagged for notability. If it can't be merged, then it should be deleted. Please let me know. Bearian (talk) 11:28, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

One source was added in August. Bearian (talk) 09:56, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

www.example.com in Namespace#Examples shows www as the namespace name and example.com as the local name. Shouldn't it be the opposite? Because www (subdomain) is below example.com . Connoisseurship (talk) 03:45, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, the first row in that table is a bad example. There are arguably three namespaces in www.example.com. ~Kvng (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kagi (search engine)#Requested move 22 September 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:37, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure they are notable and I've been following their research for a couple years now. I just have a very bare bones draft right now and am mostly just gathering references atm. I was hoping someone could direct me to articles about similar companies so I can know what to discuss. Also feel free to contribute to the draft if you want. Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask, and thank you in advance! :D Pothos144 (talk) 19:16, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

This article about an IBM feature needs sources. Please add some. Bearian (talk) 00:39, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Microsoft Recall#Requested move 30 September 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 18:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

The article 2045 in artificial intelligence has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:CRYSTAL

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 03:47, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

The article Access Authentication in CDMA networks has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as Unreferenced for 9 years. No other language has an article from which to translate. Appears too technical.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 21:20, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ray-tracing hardware#Requested move 10 October 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 19:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Alvey#Requested move 20 October 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 07:58, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

WinFS has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:22, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

The article General communication channel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced for 18 years. Tagged as such for 8 years. I tagged it for notability 4 weeks ago. Appears to be original research.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Deletion contested, consider merge or redirect to G.709 as preferred WP:ATD ~Kvng (talk) 14:16, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

The article Comparison of document interfaces has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as unsourced 8.5 years. WP:NOTHOWTO

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 16:59, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

The article Interactive programming has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No reliable sources.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 21:27, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Steam Machine (computer)#Requested move 17 November 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 21:29, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Mac Pro has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:47, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

• "This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale."

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say "priority" instead of "importance". This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower ^{Huddle • Handiwerk} 19:40, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Futura (typeface)#Requested move 29 November 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 02:07, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

An editor has requested that OKD be moved to another page, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Joy (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Microchip implant (human)#Requested move 19 December 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ROY is WAR Talk! 05:03, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Any chance someone from the project could review two pending drafts at AfC? The first is Draft:List of uses for Dollar sign in computing and the other is Draft:List of uses for At sign in computing. They both seem notable to me but looking for a second opinion from someone at the project here. You can ping me here or at the draft if you are willing. Cheers! CNMall41 (talk) 22:12, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Visual Studio Code, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. NasssaNser 04:37, 18 October 2025 (UTC)