Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Hi everyone. I was perusing the GAN list last week and was considering reviewing this article because it caught my interest. In real life, I am interested in computer science topics, so this is a topic that is particularly fascinating to me. After further review, I think there are a few additional issues with the article that need attention before the article can meet the good article criteria. Mz7 ( talk) 20:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
not sure what to do there Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 15:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Done Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 00:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 23:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 00:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Please forgive if I am not contributing correctly -- I'm not a frequent Wiki editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalster2 ( talk • contribs) 23:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Please forgive if I am not contributing correctly -- I'm not a frequent Wiki editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalster2 ( talk • contribs) 23:48, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 18:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
ehh, dont think I should do that Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 21:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Deep Blue won the deciding game after Kasparov made a mistake in the opening– what was the opening and what was the mistake? Any significant moves in the other games (I see there is that one "random" move mentioned later on)?
Dont know what to do there.
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 21:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 03:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Done with both Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 15:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
<ref>[http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 Deep blue had white and lost to Fritz in 39 moves] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081007035001/http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 |date=7 October 2008 }}</ref>
|archive-url=
, |archive-date=
, and |url-status=
parameters of cite web. So in total, something like this:<ref>{{cite web |title=8th World Computer Chess Championship |url=http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 |website=ICGA Tournaments |accessdate=4 June 2020 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081007035001/http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 |archivedate=7 October 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Preliminary review
|
---|
|
Mz7 Done, Thanks, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 02:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
I apologize for my delay following up here. Following the expansion of the "Design" section and the general reorganization of the article to improve the coverage of the technical background of the computer, I'm willing to say that "broadness" is likely covered now. There remain a few issues, however, with referencing.
|archive-url=
and |archive-date=
parameters to list the archived URL, i.e. <ref>{{cite web |title=Deep Blue - Replay the Games |url=http://www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/c.shtml |website=IBM Research |accessdate=10 June 2020 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080701232743/http://www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/c.shtml |archivedate=1 July 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Copmuter history museum—I suspect this is a typo. Make sure to capitalize it as Computer History Museum since it's a proper noun.
Ding Ding Ding! You got it :)! Thanks for seeing that. Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 16:21, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Please me know if you have any questions. I really appreciate that you've taken the time to address my concerns so far! I do think the referencing concerns here are important, however, and I would like to see them fixed before the article can pass this GA reassessment. Mz7 ( talk) 21:47, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Fritz was running on an Intel Pentium 90 MHz personal computer,
Wchess was running on a personal computer, and
Junior was running on a personal computer—where, if at all, are these statements verified in the source? Mz7 ( talk) 00:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
a massively parallel, RS/6000 SP Thin P2SC-based system with 30 nodes, with each node containing a 120 MHz P2SC microprocessor, but it wasn't immediately clear to me where this and other details in the paragraph are verified in the article. Mz7 ( talk) 01:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I believe the outcome of this reassessment should be to delist the article. This was not an easy decision for me to make. As you can see, it took a month of mulling things over, and at various points in the process, I was leaning towards keeping the article as a GA. Additionally, I respect the judgment of the GA reviewer before me, so I did not want to overrule her decision capriciously. [a]
I acknowledge that many of the issues that I identified at the start of the GAR have been mitigated over the course of the last month, and because of this, I thank The4lines for his diligent work. I definitely believe that the article today is a substantial improvement over when it was first reviewed. The "broadness" issue has been partially mitigated by some restructuring of the article, moving technical details about the design of the computer from the section about the Kasparov game to the "Design" section, which was upgraded from heading level 3 to level 2. Many of the most glaring issues with the article's citation style have also been mitigated by using standard citation templates where possible and filling in dead links with archived links.
However, the article still has issues with clarity of the prose and verifiability, especially in the "Design" section, enough that I feel that it would be most prudent to delist the article while these issues are addressed through general editing.
one of its developers even denied that it was artificial intelligencedoes not appear to be 100% accurate given the source.
GOFAI (Good Old-Fashioned Artificial Intelligence) rather than of deep learning which would come a decade lateris also unsourced.
The evaluation function had been split into 8,000 partsand
In the opening book there were over 4,000 positions and 700,000 grandmaster games. The endgame database contained many six-piece endgames and five or fewer piece positions..
In my view, this article would substantially benefit from attention from editors who are more familiar with the topic areas encompassed by this article.
[b] This would especially be useful to help improve the article's discussion of the technical design of the computer, particularly to allow it to convey a broad amount of information while still being understandable by non-technical readers. Additionally, it would also be useful to improve the coverage of the chess behind the subject. Earlier, when I suggested this, the GA nominator rejected the idea on the basis that it may be boring for some users
[5]. I respectfully disagree. The chess theory behind the matches—e.g. commentary on the mistakes that Kasparov made, the moves that Deep Blue made, etc.—would surely be fascinating to readers interested in this subject and arguably expected for a good article, especially considering the Kasparov matches essentially define the notability of this computer. There is certainly no scarcity of coverage containing this commentary out there, based on my cursory searches.
For these reasons, I believe that this article fails to meet the good article criteria at this time, and I hope that my recommendations throughout this page are helpful for improvement of the article. Mz7 ( talk) 06:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Footnotes
it is preferable that nominators have contributed significantly to the article and are familiar with its subject and its cited sources. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination.
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Hi everyone. I was perusing the GAN list last week and was considering reviewing this article because it caught my interest. In real life, I am interested in computer science topics, so this is a topic that is particularly fascinating to me. After further review, I think there are a few additional issues with the article that need attention before the article can meet the good article criteria. Mz7 ( talk) 20:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
not sure what to do there Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 15:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Done Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 00:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 23:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 00:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Please forgive if I am not contributing correctly -- I'm not a frequent Wiki editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalster2 ( talk • contribs) 23:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Please forgive if I am not contributing correctly -- I'm not a frequent Wiki editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalster2 ( talk • contribs) 23:48, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 18:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
ehh, dont think I should do that Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 21:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Deep Blue won the deciding game after Kasparov made a mistake in the opening– what was the opening and what was the mistake? Any significant moves in the other games (I see there is that one "random" move mentioned later on)?
Dont know what to do there.
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 21:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Done, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 03:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Done with both Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 15:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
<ref>[http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 Deep blue had white and lost to Fritz in 39 moves] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081007035001/http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 |date=7 October 2008 }}</ref>
|archive-url=
, |archive-date=
, and |url-status=
parameters of cite web. So in total, something like this:<ref>{{cite web |title=8th World Computer Chess Championship |url=http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 |website=ICGA Tournaments |accessdate=4 June 2020 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081007035001/http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=29 |archivedate=7 October 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Preliminary review
|
---|
|
Mz7 Done, Thanks, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 02:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
I apologize for my delay following up here. Following the expansion of the "Design" section and the general reorganization of the article to improve the coverage of the technical background of the computer, I'm willing to say that "broadness" is likely covered now. There remain a few issues, however, with referencing.
|archive-url=
and |archive-date=
parameters to list the archived URL, i.e. <ref>{{cite web |title=Deep Blue - Replay the Games |url=http://www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/c.shtml |website=IBM Research |accessdate=10 June 2020 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080701232743/http://www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/c.shtml |archivedate=1 July 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Copmuter history museum—I suspect this is a typo. Make sure to capitalize it as Computer History Museum since it's a proper noun.
Ding Ding Ding! You got it :)! Thanks for seeing that. Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 16:21, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Please me know if you have any questions. I really appreciate that you've taken the time to address my concerns so far! I do think the referencing concerns here are important, however, and I would like to see them fixed before the article can pass this GA reassessment. Mz7 ( talk) 21:47, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Fritz was running on an Intel Pentium 90 MHz personal computer,
Wchess was running on a personal computer, and
Junior was running on a personal computer—where, if at all, are these statements verified in the source? Mz7 ( talk) 00:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
a massively parallel, RS/6000 SP Thin P2SC-based system with 30 nodes, with each node containing a 120 MHz P2SC microprocessor, but it wasn't immediately clear to me where this and other details in the paragraph are verified in the article. Mz7 ( talk) 01:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I believe the outcome of this reassessment should be to delist the article. This was not an easy decision for me to make. As you can see, it took a month of mulling things over, and at various points in the process, I was leaning towards keeping the article as a GA. Additionally, I respect the judgment of the GA reviewer before me, so I did not want to overrule her decision capriciously. [a]
I acknowledge that many of the issues that I identified at the start of the GAR have been mitigated over the course of the last month, and because of this, I thank The4lines for his diligent work. I definitely believe that the article today is a substantial improvement over when it was first reviewed. The "broadness" issue has been partially mitigated by some restructuring of the article, moving technical details about the design of the computer from the section about the Kasparov game to the "Design" section, which was upgraded from heading level 3 to level 2. Many of the most glaring issues with the article's citation style have also been mitigated by using standard citation templates where possible and filling in dead links with archived links.
However, the article still has issues with clarity of the prose and verifiability, especially in the "Design" section, enough that I feel that it would be most prudent to delist the article while these issues are addressed through general editing.
one of its developers even denied that it was artificial intelligencedoes not appear to be 100% accurate given the source.
GOFAI (Good Old-Fashioned Artificial Intelligence) rather than of deep learning which would come a decade lateris also unsourced.
The evaluation function had been split into 8,000 partsand
In the opening book there were over 4,000 positions and 700,000 grandmaster games. The endgame database contained many six-piece endgames and five or fewer piece positions..
In my view, this article would substantially benefit from attention from editors who are more familiar with the topic areas encompassed by this article.
[b] This would especially be useful to help improve the article's discussion of the technical design of the computer, particularly to allow it to convey a broad amount of information while still being understandable by non-technical readers. Additionally, it would also be useful to improve the coverage of the chess behind the subject. Earlier, when I suggested this, the GA nominator rejected the idea on the basis that it may be boring for some users
[5]. I respectfully disagree. The chess theory behind the matches—e.g. commentary on the mistakes that Kasparov made, the moves that Deep Blue made, etc.—would surely be fascinating to readers interested in this subject and arguably expected for a good article, especially considering the Kasparov matches essentially define the notability of this computer. There is certainly no scarcity of coverage containing this commentary out there, based on my cursory searches.
For these reasons, I believe that this article fails to meet the good article criteria at this time, and I hope that my recommendations throughout this page are helpful for improvement of the article. Mz7 ( talk) 06:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Footnotes
it is preferable that nominators have contributed significantly to the article and are familiar with its subject and its cited sources. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination.