![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is Archive 2, which covers articles started in 2005.
Inter and I have begun to discuss improving the swarm of AMD-related pages. He suggested that we stage the conversation here. Perhaps others will join and help?
I was going to build myself an new server and I wanted to use an AMD chip. So, of course, I turned first to the Wikipedia for background.
There is a lot of information, but I found it quite chaotic and inconsistent. And, frankly, much of it wasn't up to the Wiki standards we might aspire to.
Currently, I know of these AMD-related links:
Some of these — for example List of AMD Opteron microprocessors and List of AMD Opteron models — point to the same place through redirects. But it would be nice to get a consistent structure.
And speaking of consistency, some pages that I think ought be look pretty much alike — for example List of AMD Athlon microprocessors and List of AMD Opteron microprocessors — look really different. I'm not a Double-E, so I can't say for certain that this is wrong, but it certainly looks wrong.
And lots of techno-babble words aren't defined, directly or by link. Look, for example, at the table headings in List of AMD Athlon microprocessors. I happen to know what an FSB, but the table needs a link to explain it.
I've done some clean up (you can find my fingerprints here and there), but I'd guess I've done 5% of the work that might be done. So as a straw-man proposal, I'm suggesting this structure to all of the articles:
:.-1 s/Athlon/Opteron/g
<-- vi joke :-)
The AMD Athlon article might link upward to List of AMD microprocessors and link downward to List of AMD Athlon microprocessors, but not all over the place to Opteron and Duron and so on articles (I was getting really lost the first time I went through, so I'm proposing a strict hierarchy to make it easier to remember where you are).
Oh, and all of the List of AMD <mumble> microprocessors article would look alike, to the extent that it is possible to do that.
It's easy to see how we ended up where we are: smart people just adding stuff as it came to them. It's the Wiki-way, and thank all the Wiki-gods for it. But maybe it's time to step back and organize it.
As a place to start:
Thoughts?
DanielVonEhren 00:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Alright, I've now fixed the whole article. It talks about the technology from the point of view of how and why it was important in the corporate history of AMD, rather than providing spec sheets. I've also added a section of AMD's flash business, which was a massive omission. It would still benefit from some tidy up, but I think you now get a much better feel for what AMD is about, and how they company developed. But we could do with more pre-1990 stuff now. 1970 odd to 1990 is thread bare. Timharwoodx 18:20, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is Archive 2, which covers articles started in 2005.
Inter and I have begun to discuss improving the swarm of AMD-related pages. He suggested that we stage the conversation here. Perhaps others will join and help?
I was going to build myself an new server and I wanted to use an AMD chip. So, of course, I turned first to the Wikipedia for background.
There is a lot of information, but I found it quite chaotic and inconsistent. And, frankly, much of it wasn't up to the Wiki standards we might aspire to.
Currently, I know of these AMD-related links:
Some of these — for example List of AMD Opteron microprocessors and List of AMD Opteron models — point to the same place through redirects. But it would be nice to get a consistent structure.
And speaking of consistency, some pages that I think ought be look pretty much alike — for example List of AMD Athlon microprocessors and List of AMD Opteron microprocessors — look really different. I'm not a Double-E, so I can't say for certain that this is wrong, but it certainly looks wrong.
And lots of techno-babble words aren't defined, directly or by link. Look, for example, at the table headings in List of AMD Athlon microprocessors. I happen to know what an FSB, but the table needs a link to explain it.
I've done some clean up (you can find my fingerprints here and there), but I'd guess I've done 5% of the work that might be done. So as a straw-man proposal, I'm suggesting this structure to all of the articles:
:.-1 s/Athlon/Opteron/g
<-- vi joke :-)
The AMD Athlon article might link upward to List of AMD microprocessors and link downward to List of AMD Athlon microprocessors, but not all over the place to Opteron and Duron and so on articles (I was getting really lost the first time I went through, so I'm proposing a strict hierarchy to make it easier to remember where you are).
Oh, and all of the List of AMD <mumble> microprocessors article would look alike, to the extent that it is possible to do that.
It's easy to see how we ended up where we are: smart people just adding stuff as it came to them. It's the Wiki-way, and thank all the Wiki-gods for it. But maybe it's time to step back and organize it.
As a place to start:
Thoughts?
DanielVonEhren 00:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Alright, I've now fixed the whole article. It talks about the technology from the point of view of how and why it was important in the corporate history of AMD, rather than providing spec sheets. I've also added a section of AMD's flash business, which was a massive omission. It would still benefit from some tidy up, but I think you now get a much better feel for what AMD is about, and how they company developed. But we could do with more pre-1990 stuff now. 1970 odd to 1990 is thread bare. Timharwoodx 18:20, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)