This user may have left Wikipedia. Dsimic has not edited Wikipedia since July 2016. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
↓ | Skip to bottom of the page | ↓ |
Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. |
This is Dsimic's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
Article policies
|
Archives: 1, 2 |
In a few words, I prefer to keep
discussions unfragmented. Thus, if you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. Similarly, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. As a reminder, we can use our watchlists to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, please feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere, or simply use the built-in notifications by mentioning my username while posting comments in other places. |
This is a Wikipedia
user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dsimic. |
Manual of Style (MoS) |
---|
Don't you hate it when that happens? ;) -- 168.215.131.150 ( talk) 21:21, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:SATA Express host plug.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
I have removed them from the article due to non-compliance with WP:NFC. Do not re-add them. Our policies on non-free media is very restrictive, and those are replaceable, and thus not acceptable. Werieth ( talk) 20:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Dude whats your problem with my aricle that was revelant information. You yourself make blog if you want to. Oranjelo100 ( talk) 10:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Texting: The choice of a new, illiterate, generation... Thanks for the laugh, Dsimic! Props to you for trying. PaulMEdwards ( talk) 10:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
Thanks for the explanation after you reverted some of our edits back to their original form. All makes sense.
However, with that said, we would like to request a few edits to the Serial ATA Express (SATA Express) wiki page: /info/en/?search=Serial_ATA_Express
Let me know if you have any questions or concerns to the requests above.
Many thanks,
Jbalich ( talk) 19:30, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I'd like to break out U.2 as a separate page for the connector formerly known as SFF-8639 [1]. There is a draft available now ( /info/en/?search=Draft:U.2_(SFF-8639))
Thanks! Jmhands ( talk) June 9, 2015 (UTC)
192.55.54.0/24 == Jmhands
holds true as those IP addresses belong to an address block
assigned to Intel? :) —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 14:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)References
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |website=
(
help)
Can we change the title of the "Next Generation Form Factor" wiki page to "M.2"? NGFF is its former name and I feel that the page should reflect that change as it is listed on many other pages by its proper name "M.2". Thanks! Jbalich ( talk) 18:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
We don't need to revert other people's edits in order to modify additions for flow, structure or readability. A simple cut/paste/edit would suffice and also permit others to see what was done. Nobody owns a wikipedia page. Blouis79 ( talk) 21:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Just a note, I went ahead and merged the two move requests on Talk:Linux Gaming. Having two separate move requests happening at once on the same talk page can be a bit confusing to readers, and it makes it so that consensus has to be form only once. Steel1943 ( talk) 04:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm more than happy to discuss anything - however; just because something's 'accepted' does NOT mean or make or correct. Wikipædia IS an encyclopedic work. If we follow your logic, then it's almost certain the (so-called) 'bastions' of American journalism would sink - dramatically in quality. However, they ALL have guides to proper language use. All of them. Regardless if their writers' personal idiosyncrasies, they write in a UNIFORM style.
Additionally, I was speaking to the head editor of PCWorld the other day (sheer coincidence) and HE brought up his displeasure with it's use by 'readers.' Another point; on ourpise, I forgot the gentleman's name, but, he 'writes' for an inline 'journal,' & he used INCORRECT grammar. When I pontes it out, he responded: 'rules are meant to b broken.' He must think he's Shakespeare - he's not.
Just 'because' is NOT an answer. We ALL need to uphold things. No - it's not 'the end if the world,' but it's WRONG to encourage continued MISuse. Finally. As I'm NOT changing the arrocle's structure, I fail to see HOW it has to be removed - by ... you. Of ALL people, it's people LIKE you who should ENCOURAGE PROPER use of words & speech. Why not just LEAVE it - if - IF - theirs an 'outcry,' THEN 'correct' it (lol).
But, in fact, all I did was WRITE it CORECTLY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UNOwenNYC ( talk • contribs) 23:46, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, following a review of your contributions, I have enabled reviewer rights on your account. This gives you the ability to:
Please remember that this user right:
Thank you very much! I'll make sure to use this privilege only with the best intentions, and according to the Wikipedia rules. -- Dsimic ( talk) 13:45, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
The Android 4.4 "launcher" is exclusive to the Nexus 5, and is technically part of the Google Search app, it is not a stock component of Android, and requires the non-free Google apps in order to function (thus, I cannot consider it to be a stock screenshot of Android). All other builds of 4.4 (even from Google itself, ironically) use the stock launcher from 4.3. ViperSnake151 Talk 17:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:RouterBoard R52n-M.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster ( talk) 20:50, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
It's none of your business how many edits I made.-- Oranjelo100 ( talk) 14:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
you will make me feel better when you will stop stalking and harrasing me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oranjelo100 ( talk • contribs)
About your Third Opinion request: I am a regular volunteer at the Third Opinion project. Your request for an opinion has been removed because this is primarily a conduct dispute. 3O does not handle disputes which are primarily conduct disputes, which are handled through RFC/U, ANI, or ARBCOM. Regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC) PS: @ Oranjelo100: While I express no opinion about any of the rest, you do need to sign your posts with four tildes. Failing to sign them makes following a conversation very difficult. Regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 22:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | Talk 04:38, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much! I'll make sure to use this privilege only with the best intentions, and according to the Wikipedia rules. — Dsimic ( talk) 14:18, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
The idea was to link to the page and section: /info/en/?search=Multigate_device#FinFET
So a user who clicks the "FinFET" link will be directed to a section specifically about FinFETs, rather than a more general article about various multigate devices. Is that not the correct thing to do? Or is there another issue I'm not seeing?
InternetMeme ( talk) 15:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for: Under Microsoft windows Do not used "Windows" Xp" / "Windows 7" Used Lana and Areo okay?
The Original Barnstar | |
Under Microsoft windows Do not used "Windows" Xp" / "Windows 7" Used Lana and Areo okay?
Mathsquare ( talk) 03:43, 30 November 2013 (UTC) |
Dear Dsimic, please see the "talk" section of the BLAST (protocol) article for my response to your much appreciated attention to said article. Synchronist ( talk) 01:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
I saw that you reverted my update. Thanks for catching the layout issue. It didn't seem to show up for me under preview or even after I saved the changes until I collapsed and then expanded the Android 4.4 subsection. It should be good now. I have also added some sources. -- Jimv1983 ( talk) 02:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Take a look at this. Cheers. -- uKER ( talk) 14:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for this; I hadn't noticed so thanks for updating it. In addition, while I'm sure it was implied via my use of the "thanks" feature, thanks for all your work on the Nexus 5 article. :) Best. Acalamari 23:52, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Dsimic, it does look better! Synchronist ( talk) 02:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Laravel (Framework) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://teamtreehouse.com/forum/php-frameworks-2. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - Mr X 20:35, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
History nicely fixed :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Laravel_%28framework%29&action=history Ronhjones (Talk) 20:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Didn't seem notable to me. Someone should look the promo contribs of Special:Contributions/Wikidevb (and other SPAs which wrote that FlexRAID piece) in other articles. Someone not using his real name ( talk) 18:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
@ Dsimic: That section isn't about FlexRAID. An article on FlexRAID is being prepared separately. The section was about RAID over File System as a general RAID approach. Refer to prior discussion on the entry here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spectwiki ( talk • contribs) 17:41, July 30, 2014 (UTC)
Dsimic hi, I don't normally edit articles so perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick. The material in the Nexus 4 page was waffle at the very best and that is what I removed. Is it that I have not correctly followed a procedure (there seem to be a lot) or just that you don't agree, and as a prominent editor/contributor you therefor felt justified in removing my edit with no reasoning? Just so I know what I should do in future. I contribute financially to Wikipedia and hate to see it dumbed-down with junk text. Nick (ozy1ozy) Ozy1ozy ( talk) 21:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I'm very interested in your decision to pull the list of notable people in the cloud computing industry that drive the globally significant OpenStack project? Wikipedia has no problems with low rate movies having lists of actors and such, so why should the cloud computing industry and it's currently most significant project OpenStack not be able to list the leaders of the project? it's a larger than usual "key people" list, but that's the way the governance model is structured, so it's justified to declare that. I will be putting more information up about the unique and innovative OpenStack governance model in the coming days.
Thanks DHOTOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drhopontopofus ( talk • contribs) 11:51, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dsimic, I've really enjoyed collaborating with you on Replicant (operating system). I think we have made some significant improvements. If you ever need help on a project in the future, I'll be glad to assist. -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 00:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I believe you are in violation of Wiki consensus in your constant reversion without explanation. I carefully explained my reasons in the Talk section for reverting your original edit. You ignored the talk and went ahead and reverted or reinserted without responding, twice. Please see Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. While this is not a policy, your continued reversion without discussion is close to an edit war. Tom94022 ( talk) 00:46, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I've read your discussion and I understand your reason, on one hand you're right when you say that wikipedia is not a source code repository on the other when I googled Damerau–Levenshtein distance, I was interested into knowing what that was, its applications an so on but, on the other hand, I also needed to implement it in one of my programs, so it would have been very useful to have a runnable (and possibly well written) source code on hand rather than googling again and reinventing the wheel taking pieces of sources here and there (I built the algoritmh i published from various questions on Stack Overflow). So this is my proposal: I publish the source on one website like rosettacode.org or github and then I publish the link into the "External Link", section. I've just noticed that there is already a link to a C implementation on github that I skipped yesterday, but I've looked at it now and it seems way too complicated yto be useful (for example I don't understand why a function returning a distance between 2 char vectors never uses the char or char* datatype, I'm sure that a deeper reading will unveil all the mechanism that probably threats char vector as vector of unsigned integers and that in the end it will definitely work, but my implementation, taking simply the two char vector as an input seems to me much easier and clear) Alinoli ( talk) 12:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
char
, they do use unsigned int
instead (possibly for an extended alphabet), there's even a comment on top of the source file stating that: Note we use character ints, not chars. At the same, that implementation looks a bit inefficient, as they use a linked list for deduping and storing stuff, what involves linear searches every time. —
Dsimic (
talk) 16:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)Hi, I thought from the /info/en/?search=Talk:Android_version_history#AOSP_vs_Android talk that one should not make any distictions between Android/AOSP, thus not distinguish between open and closed sourced software. Threrefore, Android as the end used know it is what is provided by Google, thus making screenshots of the GEL appropriate to represent the Android home screen. Looking at Android.com, images of the GEL is displayed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandabear123 ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic: I've been down with a bad cold since Jan 2 so haven't responded, but will in the next day or so. Thanks for being patient. You can delete this after u read it. Tom94022 ( talk) 21:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Android can technically be built upon any Linux kernel and was never limited to 3.4.10. In fact that version with the citation in the article is wrong. It's the kernel version for the HTC One ONLY. The Nexus 5 for instance uses 3.4.0. The Snap 800 note 3 also uses 3.4.0 with a slightly different revision. Older kernel versions are also used on KitKat, the second Nexus 7 has 3.1.10.
Some devices are able to use kernel 3.12 with proper sources. Even my i9001 runs 3.4.77. There is simply no standard/generic kernel version for Android, it all depends on the SoC, device and sources.
Sources:
Yowanvista ( talk) 11:45, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
What does the non-breaking space do? -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 02:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Ooops sorry I don't know what happened, your link work, but when I did the change my browser (firefox) was jumping to the bottom of the page. -- Dadu ( talk) 09:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Nikon sue only for the style, but IMO Nikon worry about Android OS, Nikon worry if something happen as mobile phone and mainly smartphone made compact camera sold only 40 percent than 2 years before, while 2013 DSLR sold is also declining. Thank you. Gsarwa ( talk) 04:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
If you are looking for a new article to edit, I just created Ark OS. It's pretty minimal right now, and could seriously benefit from that magic Dsimic touch. -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 00:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I've noticed you're setting up column formatting for References and See also in numerous articles. This is all well and good. Would you mind marking these edits as minor to keep our watchlists reasonable? Thanks. ~ KvnG 14:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Re: your edit, what was shown instead of the matrix? I have MathJax turned on because it's more reliable and produces better-looking output, so I hadn't seen the problem. Sometimes, saving without changes can force the LaTeX output to be regenerated. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 20:50, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
It's not a matter of better language but of verifiability. "A frame begins with preamble and start frame delimiter, ..." implies that preamble and SFD are part of the frame which they are not.
Your source, clause 35.2.3.2 "The preamble <preamble> begins a frame transmission. [...] The SFD (Start Frame Delimiter) <sfd> indicates the start of a frame ..." is ambiguous – it doesn't really tell where these sequences belong to. Please take a look at the more basic clauses 3.1.1 and 3.2 which very clearly show and state that preamble and SFD are not part of the frame but the (largely neglected) packet: "A MAC frame starts immediately after the SFD." (3.2.2).
With respect to your preferences I'll change the phrase to "a frame begins after the preamble and SFD". Zac67 ( talk) 18:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you. I've spent over an hour trying to find the origin of {{ Timeline Debian GNU/Linux}} as used in the main Debian Wikipedia article. It's out of date (and I think about to become more so), but I can't find the "source" with which to fix it. I see you take an interest in that Debian article, and are probably more skilled than I am on Wiki-matters, so I hope you can point me to the relevant editing page. Larry Doolittle ( talk) 20:35, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
{{t|Template_name}}
tag comes handy. Also, you can manually create and open a direct URL in form of
/info/en/?search=Template:template_name.It doesn't look like ThinkPad Tablet 2 is Android? Frietjes ( talk) 23:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Regarding your "
cleanup" of my edit on
Intel HD Graphics, I was following the format mentioned to me by
Paine Ellsworth (
talk ·
contribs), who told me that {{
redr}}
should be used even if only one category is desired and that a line break should be put between the template and the redirect itself. Is there evidence that this is no longer the consensus? (I see now that
WP:REDCAT mentions the line break but not {{redr}}; I'm not sure how regularly that guideline is being updated though.) --
SoledadKabocha (
talk) 05:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
{{R ...}}
categorization syntax; basically, {{
redr}} template is (still) just a proposal for a redirects unification and not officially suggested to be used, as visible from its documentation and
WP:REDCAT. If {{
redr}} template had become the offical way for tagging redirects, there would be bots automatically editing redirect pages thus making it used all around.{{R ...}}
tag – I've seen hundreds of such redirects (and zero redirects using {{
redr}} template, by the way). I'm not saying that merging it into the same line is by the book, but it makes such "one-R" redirects a bit more readable, I'd guess, so editors tend not to put single "R-tags" into separate lines. IIRC, I've even seen a few bots placing these tags into the same line, while fixing double redirects etc. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 06:08, 17 February 2014 (UTC){{R ...}}
tags – though, that's only my opinion. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 00:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC){{R ...}}
tags, I'd say that adding a 1em
top padding to the message box would make a world of difference, as right now it sits too close to the redirect description. It's somewhat "blingy" when compared to the R-tag's output, but it's quite nice once that old imprint is gone – but still, that padding would put a cherry on top. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 03:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Is there any conclusion I should draw from this discussion yet? (Paine Ellsworth, sorry for relying on WP:Notifications rather than notifying you manually.)
Is it worth formally proposing that {{
redr}}
is to be used
iff multiple categories are desired? What syntax will be used for "{{
R from alternative language}}'s parameters in Redr"? --
SoledadKabocha (
talk) 18:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
<div>
element with the required CSS definition, as those might play better with the rest of the page elements, when compared to placing a more simple <br />
. Also, including a simple <br />
actually creates a surrounding <p>
element containing that <br />
in the rendered HTML code, what results in a vertical spacing much larger than the desired 1em
spacing. Of course, no modifications should go to the already existing templates, everything goes into the {{
Redr}}'s composition of them.Undo you here. I just thought I accidentally inserted two blank lines. Beware that there has been some unholy MOS war about this issue, i.e. how many lines are allowed in the footer. (General pointer [1]) Someone not using his real name ( talk) 20:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Please do not remove red links, as you did at Metadata - they're a deliberate feature of Wikipedia; see WP:REDLINK. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
On reflection I think this comment was unnecessarily harsh and I'm sorry for it. – Steel 22:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For your distinction between Android RAM requirements and recommendations. read ( talk) 23:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC) |
I removed categories because the article already was part of subcategories of them, for example, all Capacitive touchscreen mobile phones are automatically "also" Touchscreen mobile phones, and as a consequence automatically "also" Mobile phones. At least at Commons, where I'm more familiar with categorising, this would be a clear case of overcategorisation. | FDMS 17:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm curious what you think. If you want to revert it all, or make massive edits, that's okay. I just figured it wasn't so dubious I had to do it in a talk page; I figured I'd WP:BB and do the edit process live. 71.41.210.146 ( talk) 23:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, cool guy
I could come up with several reasons to perform this deletion but I chose one that covers them all. In case I wasn't clear enough, here is my concerns: You see, the text is unreferenced, has no context and is very technical, so much so that only interests a minority. So, I supplied manual as the reason because manual is the place where you read unreferenced technical stuff like this. (If you'd have to add a source for them, your source would be most likely a manual.)
When I removed them, I thought chances are that they are listed in one of the sources in close proximity, so no one misses anything. But if nothing else, let's at least solve the invalid HTML problem. It's ordered list item -> definition list -> definition item, which is not good. The same list can be written in prose form.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 01:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, I thought my edit summary was quite clear that I was about to do another undo (which I can't do now due to the edit conflict and overlapping edit region). Can you revert yourself so I may show you without me having to undo again? Widefox; talk 22:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. Someone not using his real name ( talk) 23:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC) |
Dear Dragan: I am injecting myself into the dialogue regarding artificial intelligence (see the newly created User:Synchronist), and I am counting on you to be my Virgil! User:Qwertyus also alerted! Synchronist ( talk) 05:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the thanks. I’m confused by your latest edits here. "Assembly object" is a fairly important concept. I’m not sure what your objection to it is, but I found the new edits harder to understand. I think we should put more work into this. Strebe ( talk) 08:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
As far as I'm noticed, the last part of the article was about whether that thing is android or not, but the last statement which i removed and you added back suggest there are android applications available......The system's android compatibility is announced officially and as far as I concerned, neither side of the argument used the ability to install many android apps as a main argument... C933103 ( talk) 20:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
The Technology Barnstar | ||
For your extensive contributions in the field of computing. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 13:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC) |
I'm glad I'm not the only one bothered by Lowercase sigmabot's failure to add a line break! Thanks for fixing it. Note that I complained about the issue earlier this month, but the issue stalled after the fix caused an error. If you would like, you are welcome to and reference my thread in the archives. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 05:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey, with this edit: Special:Permalink/596825429 you moved the article because of its punctuation. How do you know the correct punctuation? Help:Punctuation does not help me. User:ScotXW t@lk 15:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. :) Sloppy writing has no place in the compendium of the human knowledge, we should extinguish this uclear construct used by those too lazy to decide whether to use and or or. Sofia Koutsouveli ( talk) 23:07, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Please don't insert blank lines between indented talk page posts, as you have been doing at
User talk:Σ. This goes against both
WP:LISTGAP (Do not separate list items, including items in a
definition list (a list made with leading semicolons and colons)
) and
WP:INDENTGAP (Blank lines should not be used between indented lines as they are currently rendered as the end of a list and the start of a new one.
). Thank you. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 09:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Oranjelo100 is at it again. Now he's moved on to game emulation. I'm not asking you to do anything. I just thought I'd let you know, in case he's continued abusing your scope of involvement with Wikipedia, because I saw your history of trying so valiantly and thoroughly to deal with this person. You handled it perfectly, and incredibly thoroughly, and positively but realistically, and I completely agree with you. You were given ridiculous advice such as "perhaps you could have been slightly" blah blah. No, you pretty much couldn't. :( — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 10:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Dsimic. I noticed you reverted my change to the backporting page. I used to think that backporting meant applying bug fixes from new versions to old versions just like the article used to explain, but https://backports.wiki.kernel.org and the http://backports.debian.org/ do not fit that mold, hence my expansion. As it is, the article is back to not defining the term in a comprehensive enough manner. Do you have a better definition? If not, all unrevert and let somebody else improve it. ARosa ( talk) 04:23, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic, good to see you added the bitstream entry. I'd refrained (I guess we both came to BSD dab from Phoronix?!) as there wasn't a vendor neutral target, so I quickly created something and changed the target and entry. Widefox; talk 09:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
<!-- warning: something links here -->
comments. :) —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 03:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)Why did you remove Cache Intersystems from well known DBMS? This is the premier DBMS for healthcare systems and many financial institutions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.47.54 ( talk) 01:59, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
You recently changed existing <code> tags to <tt> on the Crypto API (Linux) article. Why? As far as I can tell, there is no visual difference between them. "Code" seems like a more descriptive version and I've seen people convert them the other way around. -- intgr [talk] 09:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Here's some text with inside the <code> tag,
FYI OpenSSH is a fork of OSSH, which is a fork of ssh by Tatu Ylönen. See Project History and Credits page of OpenSSH site. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk• track) 21:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey. Look at this: Microsoft Cortana Easter Eggs. Looks like someone makes an article every time Microsoft so much as sneezes or burps. 188.245.55.0 ( talk) 15:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox mobile phone#Unrestricted bootloader. You were selected because of recent edits to the article Android rooting. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:03, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Check the Graphics Lab. I've had a crack at the M.2 keying request. :) NikNaks talk - gallery 20:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Masssly. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Red Hat Linux because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. — Sadat (Masssly)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:KDE. Thanks. Codename Lisa ( talk) 10:40, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
|l1=
from people's talk pages; but you are open-minded and friendly. So, I abused your hospitality and did that edit.
I looked at the UEFI articles on 12 computers. Each one carried the n which was almost unreadable by people inquisitive of knowing what boot lingo mean. I thought I could help by making the n bold n.
Anyway, no issues. thanx for the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zambi007 ( talk • contribs) 05:09, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ScottXW and his "deletion heros". Thank you. Yunshui 雲 水 08:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Dsimic: this is a notice that after a MfD and two RfCs, the Editor Review process has been officially retired. You should not expect further comments on your open Editor Review, which will be archived soon. In the coming weeks there may be information available on alternative processes that you can pursue if you so desire. —/ Mendaliv/ 2¢/ Δ's/ 21:05, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Why does lowercase make more sense to you? If you are going to revert somebody's edit, you should provide a more elaborate reason than what arbitrarily makes more sense to you. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 05:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, Dsimic! Now that the move of "Android rooting" to "Rooting (Android OS)" has been completed, I know you'll be interested in this parallel proposal:
I'll see you there, I'm sure! =) — Jaydiem ( talk) 19:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know that I had missed items for my ZFS edit. I've updated it, and it should meet the requirements, year & references. Let me know if additional information is required. A'kwell ( talk) 20:30, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I do not understand how the article can be full of e.g. "flash-based" with a hyphen, and that is fine, but as soon as it becomes "flash memory-based" the hyphen is supposed to change to an en-dash.
Why??? What is the justification here? What is the benefit? I think it just clutters up the wikitext, makes editing more difficult, and will require more redirects when these things get into article titles (since nobody will be typing in the keycodes for endashes in the search box). Jeh ( talk) 06:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Please do not use that style of citation syntax on articles. The |publisher field is designed to list the publishing company of the work, not the domain name it came from. The title of the website must be in either a |work or |website field. Also please do not use Android Police as a source; it is a blog, and blogs are typically not considered reliable sources. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
|website=
parameter. However, to me web sites are publishers and specifying their domains instead is more usable in many cases, but of course that's debatable. For example, if a
LWN.net article is used as a reference, I'd say that 99% of people wouldn't recognize "Eklektix" when it's specified as a publisher, while "LWN.net" is pretty much widely recognizable. Should we end up using something like "|website=
LWN.net |publisher=Eklektix" for this example?Thank you for your recent improvements to kmscon article. Posting here only because I didn't want to spam your echo notification log with multiple "thanks" (for each edit). Good work! — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk• track) 08:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I was just commenting on a feature SSH has. Yes, it allows to "punch" through a firewall, but I don't how that affects the text. Should I revert and append a reference to the manpage of openssh where that feature is described?
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=ssh&sektion=1 option "ssh -R [bind_address:]port:host:hostport"
Cruzzer ( talk) 10:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Re: Power supply unit (computer): the calculation is explained in the next sentence. Otherwise, the other result is not explained either. Glrx ( talk) 17:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
By this logic, the following pages should also be removed, correct?
The list goes on ad nauseam, and that's only the computer related things! The fact is these drives are extremely hard to find information on, instead of removing a list that's a challenge to maintain, we should allow everyone to help grow the list like all these others... Isn't that the spirit of Wikipedia anyway? I created this list out of frustration over not being able to find a good list that shows all available, or even most of the available M.2 SSDs, which I'm currently in the market for. My original plan was to put the list on one of the forums I frequent, but then I thought 'this list would best serve everyone if it was available on an unbiased site where anyone can contribute to it'... There is only one place I know of like that — Preceding unsigned comment added by DracoDan82 ( talk • contribs) 15:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey everyone! DracoDan82, trust me, I understand your intentions and associated confusion, so please allow me to explain a bit further. Oh, and by the way, please sign your posts on talk pages. :)
Let's start with the definition of "encyclopedic"... As we know, Wikipedia has grown into a medium-sized :) monster when it comes to its Manual of Style and the set of rules articles need to follow, thus it's important what those rules say, not what a dictionary definition of "encyclopedic" might be. :) That's how every system works, and one must play by the rules of a system; luckily, Wikipedia's rules are truly awesome when you compare them to the rules of many other systems. Also, Wikipedia's rules can always be discussed, improved and potentially changed by the principle of establishing a consensus.
Regarding the first batch of "List of XYZ" articles, I totally agree with Jeh that almost all of them are clear candidates to be nominated for deletion. Let's just have a look at the Comparison of stackable switches article, for example – that article looks almost like a bad joke, as not even 25% of the available stackable switches are covered there. At the same time, that article should be called Comparison of stackable Ethernet switches instead, as there are also things like FibreChannel switches, for example – not all switches are Ethernet switches. It's always better not to have a list-of-XYZ at all, rather than having an incomplete and outdated list. On the other hand, lists are almost always badly updated, so they eventually become outdated.
At the same time, when a certain manufacturer (or even a model) is left out from the List of microwave owens, for example, such a list clearly becomes a favoring of other manufacturers (or models), what slowly creeps into the field of adertising. And, we're not here to advertise anything. :)
Let's have a look at more examples from the above. Comparison of Linux distributions is also a true mess, filled with pretty much outdated information; I've tried to clean it up once, and gave up quickly as I by no means have internal knowledge of 50+ Linux distributions, while becoming familiar enough (and staying familiar, for later updates) with each of them would be a very time-consuming (and pretty much pointless) thing to do. Of course, there are people on Wikipedia who have deep knowledge of all those Linux distributions—such people wrote the associated articles—but they either don't care about updating the Comparison of Linux distributions article or don't even know that it exists. Thus, sooner or later, all those lists turn into a mess.
Now, let's have a look at the second batch of "List of XYZ" articles, and compare it to the batch #1. The second batch has a much better reason for its existence, as each of the articles lists products coming from a single manufacturer, or a single line of products made by a specific manufacturer. Thus, even if a product or two are missing from such lists, that doesn't turn into advertising, what's a good thing. However, I'd never rely solely on the data available from the List of Dell PowerEdge Servers, for example, and instead I'd always go to the manufacturer's website; however, sometimes even the manufacturer introduces various changes to available server models that aren't even available on its website (and you become aware of them only after you've purchased a server – BTDT). With all that in mind, it's quite hard to expect "List of XYZ" articles to be always up-to-date. However, I'd say that the batch #2 doesn't deserve to be nominated for deletion, as it serves the purpose of an initial look-up for a particular product line.
Then, how does all that apply to the List of M.2 SSDs? Of course, that would be a good question. :) Well, if we had List of Crucial M.2 SSDs (or even List of Crucial SSDs) instead, I might vote for having such an article; though, it would be a quite short article. :) With the List of M.2 SSDs, there's simply too much room for turning it into advertising, especially as M.2 SSDs are currently a somewhat "hot topic" and a few manufacturers (as always) are trying to dominate the market.
Thoughts? — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 06:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Ironically your revert comment came at a point I was fixing the same issue. See reworked version which should be simpler and more direct, and better tone (you probably saw it just now).
See what you think, fix what you need to, but try to avoid wholesale "plain reverting" :)
I look forward to discussing anything you want to, on the t/p later. FT2 ( Talk | email) 14:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kpatch. Since you had some involvement with the kpatch redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- intgr [talk] 10:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
HI, this is my first reponse on a talk page, please forgive me if I mangle this submission. I found your TSX page quite good. I was wondering if you have an affiliation with Intel or have a contact with someone responsible for TSX at Intel? Regards, AndrewX – 12.15.146.127 ( talk) 13:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
There you go violating BRD again. Your reversion to your text (after your change was reverted) is considered edit warring. The next stage is supposed to be "Discuss". It is not BRRD. Jeh ( talk) 07:26, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
As discussed in Talk:Hard disk drive § Highlights In History Section, bulleted list from the Hard disk drive § History section is now converted and compacted into a table, please check it out. At the same time, the troublesome footnote has been deleted. Looking good? — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 08:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
In a recent edit to the page Transactional Synchronization Extensions, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/1338/are-collective-nouns-always-plural-or-are-certain-ones-singular Little Professor ( talk) 18:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding to discuss a disruptive IP-hopping editor that edits Nvidia-related articles. The thread is Disruptive edits by IP-hopper on Nvidia-related articles. Thank you. — Jesse Viviano ( talk) 17:40, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
You're very welcome. Now I wonder what you think of my edits to your edits. One is basically a revert. :-)
As mentioned in the edit comment, other than forgetting the final "s" on "suspects", I really was quite fond of that description of the reason for PING packets "This avoids the need to send a large DATA packet if the host suspects the device will just respond with NAK." If that's actually unclear, I'm curious how you interpreted it. Anyway, I tried a different phrasing. (Good reference finding, BTW.)
One change I wanted to make, but haven't found the right words for, is to split up the two uses of "non-standard" in the cable plugs table. Mini-A to micro-B is weird, but perfectly reasonable. A to A may exist, but you can't talk USB over it.
Another thing I'm tempted to do is mark the mini plugs as deprecated, tinting the column & row headers, and switch the compatibility matrix entries to green. To me, that reflects reality a bit better. What do you think? – 71.41.210.146 ( talk) 20:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I linked the entries as I did on the dab page IML because WP:DABPIPE encourages linking the article itself, rather than redirects. ENeville ( talk) 22:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello - I notice you've undertaken a lot of work to build out the F5 page...nice work. Could you help me? I am wondering where the content for "history of software development" originates. I cannot find the sources and I am wondering if you are the brother of Bojan Simic and getting content from him. Any help you can provide is appreciated. – Jaim Harlow 17:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Just a heads up to let you know I responded to your request with a question. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks you for your comment in revert in Duff's device with link to WP:COMPNOW. I think we should somehow mention in introduction that this method was used in 1980-s and in early 1990-s, but can be harmful for modern optimizing compilers (it creates very complex CFG - control flow graph - which should be deoptimized back into simple unrolled loop before compiler can optimize it in correct way)... a5b ( talk) 17:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Chealer continues to edit-war [2] [3] on the Heartbleed article, even though I've asked them numerous times to discuss their changes on the article talk page, yet they still refuse. I'm not sure what to do next. Do you have any ideas? A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 23:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I think 'class="hintergrundfarbe6"' is a color code for the cells. I borrowed the tables from a German Wikipedia page haha, the class may not apply here. Thanks, again, for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jchap1590 ( talk • contribs) 23:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Hard disk drive § An End To The RAMAC Price Duologue. Please help end the duologue on capacity and price of the IBM RAMAC Model 350 disk file. Thanks. Tom94022 ( talk) 21:49, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
{{anchor|2-clause}} === {{anchor|2-CLAUSE}} 2-clause license ("Simplified BSD License" or "FreeBSD License") === Content ... ...
Hello. I assumed that {{
anchor|2-clause}}
and {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
are hidden anchors and "#2-clause license ("Simplified BSD License" or "FreeBSD License")"
is an explicit anchor, which is the opposite to a "hidden anchor". Maybe I got wrong, maybe you meant "anchor with an all capitalized name" by saying "explicit anchor"? --
Tomchen1989 (
talk) 23:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
<span id="Section title" class="mw-headline">Section title</span>
{{
anchor|2-clause}}
and {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
are explicit anchors, and "#2-clause license ("Simplified BSD License" or "FreeBSD License")"
is an implicit anchor, just the opposite to what I thought LOL. Whatever.. Thank you for clarifying this. I'm aware of these concepts and techniques, I just didn't know what you meant by saying "explicit anchor". <a name="link_here"></a>
(btw no whitespace is allowed in name or id attribute in the specification) was used, but now it is not supported by
HTML5. Although the template's name is {{
Anchor}}, it renders as a <span id="link_here"></span>
rather than an anchor element <a></a>
in HTML actually.{{
anchor|2-clause}}
{{
anchor|3-clause}}
{{
anchor|4-clause}}
with lowercased names, but we only have {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
with a uppercased one. There should not be too much {{
anchor}}. As a shortcut, one {{
anchor}} for every section title is usually enough. It is reasonable to remove that "isolated" (no other anchor with uppercased name) {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
I guess. I don't see using all-uppercase name for anchors is conventional at all. Unless if it's an unwritten but relatively conventional approach used or advocated by even a small majority of editors, I don't think it's good to use uppercase names.--
Tomchen1989 (
talk) 00:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC){{
Anchor|2-clause}}
in the
BSD licenses article, I've contributed to the whole confusion by looking at the Wiki code by clicking on "edit" links right to the section titles; this explicit (or however it should be called :) anchor is placed in a separate line before the section title, what makes it invisible when a section is edited. I totally agree that {{
Anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
is then redundant, but according to documentation of the {{
Anchor}} template additional anchors should be part of the lines that contain section titles (== {{Anchor|EXAMPLE}}Section title ==
, for example).<a href=""></a>
anchor, or the URL "http://...", rather than the thing we are talking about)<a href=""></a>
. However the word is largely used and may considered OK){{
Anchor|2-clause}}
is outside the section and invisible when the section is edited, I put all those anchor templates inside their related section titles. --
Tomchen1989 (
talk) 10:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)#ABC
in a URI works only with <a href=""></a>
if there is no additional JavaScript code that would handle the page positioning. With all that, MediaWiki's "anchor" is pretty much unrelated to true HTML anchor elements – it's more of an abstraction of that concept, if you agree.{{
Anchor|...}}
templates
into section titles! —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 20:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Hey, I just wanted to offer my apology since my edit summary wasn't as polite as it could have. Sorry about that and glad that you took it so well. Cheers! -- uKER ( talk) 02:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Nice job on the Docker, it looks much better now! Best, -- Nabak ( talk) 16:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
What about the Sony Xperia Z3 and the Sony Xperia Z3 Compact? -- Jobu0101 ( talk) 20:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I know HHVM is defined as HipHop Virtual Machine in that article; I meant exactly what I said, which was that no pronunciation is given. My point was that, as a native English speaker, I can see no way to pronounce "HHVM" other than as an initialism.
I admit all that was a bit unnecessary, so, sorry for such a wordy edit summary in the first place; but I digress. To get to the point:
{{
Redr}}
or only the single-rcat templates?-- SoledadKabocha ( talk) 00:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
{{
R from initialism}}
was totally fine.{{
R from initialism}}
also refers to itself with a capital R. At the same time, I'd usually leave such edits to Wiki code unchanged, but I've used that more to quickly
comment back. Not a great way to do that, I know; hopefully you find that acceptable. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 02:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)Thank you. I've been trying for a few years in the Turkish language. I know Wikipedia, but I do not have much English :( -- Fsandlinux ( talk) 19:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
I think the guy you just reverted was referring to the fact that Google officially announced Lollipop for the N4 a couple of days ago. -- uKER ( talk) 12:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, there, sir! I was wondering if you would be able to provide assistance with improving the RAID-Z section (which was) in the non-standard RAID levels article. the information was unsourced and has been deleted by another user. I feel this is an important topic on the subject of non-standard RAID and would like to ask for your help in recreating the section. Thanks, in advance, for any consideration. Jchap1590 ( talk) 07:33, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Dragan,
I found your Picture of a small Voltage and Current Meter for USB-Connections on Wikipedia: File:USB voltage and current meter.jpg.
As I am preparing an article about Charging of portable devices from different sources and especially the Problems the User should be aware, I am asking you two questions:
I am awaiting your kind reply. kind regards, or as Radio Amateurs around the world would say: vy 73.
Hartwig Harm, DH2MIC http://dh2mic.darc.de [in German :-( ] mailto: dh2mic@darc.de — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.148.215.15 ( talk) 16:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
The request about Wikipedia style and naming looks confusing. 84.127.115.190 ( talk) 23:52, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
My friend Dragan! First of all, I see that you have been recognized by one of my few other Wikipedia buddies QWERTYVS [or is it QWERTYUS ?]; and so I draw your joint attention to the anomalous Wikipedia entry on the movie "Red Planet Mars", which movie (which I have just viewed on Youtube) was a quite heartfelt and anomalous comment on the possibility that compassion is a universal reality! But the Wikipedia entry itself is way, way out there! Synchronist ( talk) 05:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for reverting your changes to Ethernet. I mistook 1BASE5 for 10BASE5. I don't think I would have made this error if you had linked to StarLAN instead of 1BASE5. I'm tempted to change that. Do you have any objection? ~ KvnG 15:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Widefox; talk 18:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Category Linux kernel on Commons is empty, actually in use category Linux-Kernel. -- Victor •talk 18:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC).
I saw your desire for a lowercase username on
your user page. While not technically possible for the reasons you state, you can somewhat fake it by adding {{
Lowercase title}}
to your user page and user talk page, then changing the capitalization in your signature. This is just merely a tip from your friend who also prefers a lowercase username. –
voidxor (
talk |
contrib) 20:57, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Don't feel bad about making this error; even native English speakers make it all of the time (myself included). The problem is English spelling—not you! May I suggest the following userbox? – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 21:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Code | Result | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
{{ User:Asarlaí/Userbox spelling reform}} |
|
Usage |
Months ago, I wrote a review about Dsimic. I have defended this user when he made a good decision. Now, I would like Dsimic to reflect on his contributions; I am aware of what has happened in Linux distribution. 84.127.115.190 ( talk) 06:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm not looking for support. I'm trying to warn people (and give accurate info) about the FACT that PAD, a game enjoyed by millions of people several times a day on Android, will not be playable for them once they allow the upgrade to 5.0. Since you're well-established here, perhaps you can add that info in the appropriate ways and places? To those who play the game (and those seeking facts about ART vs. D.) it is significant. Thanks! JT ( talk) 02:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The HDD article concerns HDDs, not SSDs. HDDs less than 100 MB aren't common, because they're largely obsolete. Cluttering the article with SSD-specific provisos and eventualities is not justified. It just adds clutter. SSD formatting should be addressed elsewhere, not here. 71.128.35.13 ( talk) 22:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Could you weight in on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DDR5 SDRAM, since it seems that nobody feels qualified to "vote"? Thanks! Thue ( talk) 18:45, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, there is broken link in article in Ref. #3. -- Victor •talk 19:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC).
Dragan, I have for the first time found it necessary to stick a fork in something -- see my recent edit to the "Semantic Search" article. The guys at IDMARCH are giving semantic search a bad name, and so I have tried to follow the BOLD directive -- but perhaps there was a better way? Synchronist ( talk) 04:41, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Since you made the solid-state storage redirect, just notifying that because I have been informed there are some other kinds of non-drive storage (cards) I turned the SSS page into a disambig. Was wondering if you know any other types, or if I am wrong and other forms of solid-state storage like the SD Card might be considered drives in some way. -- 64.228.88.135 ( talk) 01:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, both illustrations in this article are out of date: as if OpenBSD "quit" :) in mid-2013, as if Mac OS X is not OS X now and v.10.10, etc., etc... You may answer in Gr. Lab. -- Victor •talk 08:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC).
We don't know its cache system until we see the actual product in fall 2015. Before that we'd stick with current info. Please do not edit this unless you're an employee that works for Intel. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.33.215 ( talk) 08:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
{{
Citation needed}}
. However, it's quite unlikely that the L1 cache in
Skylake is going to be bumped to 128 KB, but the time will tell whether that will be the case. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 08:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC){{
Citation needed}}
may be removed if the sources haven't been provided for extended periods of time, and in this case no sources have been provided since October 2014. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 18:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)Hi. I saw that you deleted the addition about PDF pages on WP:Citing sources, on the grounds of avoiding browser-dependent stuff and/or needing more explanation of where it works. As far as I know it works in all popular browsers, including the built-in PDF viewers and Adobe plug-ins for Chrome, Firefox, IE, and Safari. And according to SourceOhWatch (SrotahaUvacha), who originally added it, if a browser doesn't support it, then it degrades gracefully with the browser displaying the first page.
I added a comment to Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#PDF page links, with a link to a PDF explaining these hash URIs. If you know of any browser-dependent issues, could you leave a comment there? Otherwise I'd like to put it back. Thanks. – Margin1522 ( talk) 15:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Don't do this again. It is pointlessly antagonistic. There is nothing which makes an editor look less suitable for collaborative development than this sort of idiotic revert war. The rationale behind keeping the case is that if the link is somehow transformed such that the piping is no longer necessary (such as in "Interface" in your example, where the pipe trick means the piped text can be omitted entirely in the edit) it doesn't accidentally enter wrongly-cased text. If you've some control issues with your life that you need to work out, do it somewhere else. Argh, and this was going so well. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
{{
Lowercase title}}
only displays lowercase titles while reading articles. Thus, following the Wikipedia's approach down to piped article links makes things more consistent; the text to right of the pipe is what's to be displayed, while the text on the left is pretty much Wikipedia's "key" for the linked article. In regular non-piped links, using a lowercase title (where appropriate, of course) actually determines what's displayed, with automatic conversion into article "keys" (capitalized titles) when a page is rendered and actual URLs are generated. In other words, using "keys" in piped links stays to Wikipedia's (externally visible) internal way of referencing articles.[[Article|article]]
also be used?" Because only the first letters in article links become automatically capitalized, no matter what, and that can be relied upon to produce valid "keys". At the same time, repeating pretty much the same string twice would be overly redundant.[[Article|article]]
was not a suggestion for something like that to be used, but exactly the opposite; that was just a self-asked question for my reasoning.[[Article|something]]
form is much more commonly used than [[article|something]]
. Thus, capitalized form is far away from being "not in common use". —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 13:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Just saw your edit on
restrict
with the pithy description "Hm, doesn't look like an improvement". How is marking an example as flawed (is not actually an example due to other issues) even if one cannot (maybe just then) add a correct one, *not an improvement*? I reverted your edit.
94.220.161.15 (
talk) 22:57, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
restrict
in place, the pointers can still overlap or be the same as restrict
is merely a hint to the C compiler. Additionally, could you please elaborate a bit on how and why the example in
Restrict § Optimization section is broken?Hi, re this edit, mousing is a word, see wikt:mouse#Verb. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
In early computer the CPU it was the only unit that handed all the system. The only "clever" unit. All passed through the CPU (memory accesses, interrupts, etc.). So that the name "central". To day the function of old CPUs is to execute only the "instructions" of a program and no other. It is equivalent to another processor, for instance Disk processor, Graphic processor etc., just only with a different task. The correct name would have to be "instruction processor" but it is called shortly only "processor". We have Intel processor, PowerPC processor etc. but no one recall the term CPU, why ?. Because it is obsolete. Please does not to confuse the term "central" with the "main" meaning, that is the most important processor just only because execute the instructions that are the main function of a computer. I am a super expert in the computer field, mainly in multiprocessor e NUMA system with several patents (more than twenty: find: Ferruccio Zulian patent). I have collaborated with Olivetti, IBM, General Electric, Honeywell, Bull, AT&T, NCR during more than 30 years as computer architect with more a tens design systems. In wiki there are many not correct information written by no not expert people. Ferry24.Milan ( talk) 19:37, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi!
I just read in Wikipedia about ECC memory. Under solutions it lists ECC memory and RAM parity memory. But I find the wording misleading, because the memory itself is not performing the ECC nor the parity algorithm. The memory only offers an extra-wide memory bus (typically 72 instead of 64 bits). The error detection and correction is in all cases a feature of the CPU / the memory controller which creates the parity bits and writes them to the extra-wide memory bus. Upon a READ, the controller receives the data including parity bits, verifies and corrects the data then continues it's processing of that data.
I think it is not clear enough on Wikipedia that ECC/parity are mainly microcontroller-features, just because of the wording "ECC memory", "Parity memory"
But in fact there is now new DRAM-memory on the market with 'on-chip integrated ECC error correction'. See http://www.intelligentmemory.com/ECC-DRAM/ . These ECC DRAMs really perform the complete algorithm inside the memory components on their own. They do not require any special microcontrollers with parity or ECC functionalities, nor an extra wide memory bus is required. Upon a WRITE to the ECC DRAMs, they generate parity-bits and store them separate from the data into an additional memory-area. On a READ, they logic on the ECC DRAMs performs the hamming algorithm and outputs verified&corrected data.
The interesting thing about these ECC DRAMs is that they are 100% compatible to JEDEC standard DRAM components. They can be used in any existing application on the market, no matter if the memory controller is having a 8, 16, 32 or 64 bit bus, and no matter if the controller has own features to handle ECC or parity.
I did not feel comfortable trying to change the Wikipedia entry as my mother-language is not English. Additionally, I work for a company that is distributing the products of Intelligent Memory and I really do not want the Wikipedia page to look like 'advertising'. Still, I am fascinated by the technology and find it worth mentioning. If you would like to work on some changes, I am ready to help and provide lots of input (how about a block diagram explaining the way 'on chip integrated ECC' works?). I am in the memory business since 23 years and can surely support to make some things a bit clearer / more correct.
Regards, Thorsten Wronski t.wronski@memphis.ag 80.156.59.106 ( talk) 15:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Totally agreed, as the purpose of ECC memory is to recover from singe-bit errors. If having single-bit errors from time to time would be seen as a sign of bad DRAM, that would mean it is possible to manufacture perfect DRAM that would never ever encounter bit flips – and as we know, that's pretty much impossible.
Everything shows that ECC DRAM is they way to go, either through native hardware support or by using DRAM chips with integrated ECC functionality. Hopefully more equipment manufacturers will share the same point of view. :) Do you, maybe, have any insights why there aren't any laptops with ECC memory? That's very strange, and I'd be extremely happy to pay even a significant price premium for such a laptop.
The silent (or not so silent) corruption you're experiencing in data storage is really interesting. Does the manufacturer of storage system you're using have anything to say? I wonder how would Btrfs or ZFS perform in such an environment... Is the overall storage capacity and number of HDDs something you'd be comfortable with sharing here? — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 07:44, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't mind sending out samples to them, but Phoronix is very much related to standard comsumer PC hardware, while the ECC DRAM makes most sense in the area of industrial, military, medical, automotive, avionics, networking and other electronic devices which use DRAM chips rather than modules. However, anything that helps creating an awareness will be fully supported by me. Do you know the people there and can brief them a bit and then ask them to contact me? Otherwise it becomes a 'blind call' which is less effective.
And if you have ideas for industrial markets, let me know as well. I like the Wikipedia idea generally, but it has to be carefully created in a way that 1) people searching for ECC technologies find it and 2) it does not appear as a promotion.
It could fit well as a new point 5.14 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_random-access_memory and also mentioned in point 6 of the same entry. What do you think?
And it could fit into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamming_code under point 5 ("see also") and point 7 (references). Maybe even a point "implementations" could be added referring to integrated ECC on DRAM by Intelligent Memory as well as to integrated ECC on SRAM memory by Cypress (they have done it for some of their SRAMs. Let me know if you need the link)
Do you dare to add/modify these Wikipedia entries? 80.156.59.106 ( talk) 13:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I'll try to find some "flaky" candidates for the "transplantation" of DRAM chips. You're right, there are countless other models of Wi-Fi access points / routers, and none of them is free of lockups and misbehavior; in other words, that's a huge market for ECC memory, with potentially huge benefits for the mankind. But, how to convince people that ECC memory is beneficial, that's the hard thing... :) That's why I've suggested all those steps for increasing the level of public awareness. — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 13:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Password Saeba Ryo (
talk) 12:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi. User:Password Saeba Ryo has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of User:Janagewen. -- Claw of Slime ( talk) 12:13, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
I invite you to this page to discuss that should the consistency of talk pages of IA-32, x86 and x86-64 should be kept! Because I've seen you as one of most active editors there. So thank you! Remover remover ( talk) 15:14, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Was this really necessary? To boost your edit count? I added the tag and reason; do we need to start nitpicking over a period? WP:OWN -- 82.136.210.153 ( talk) 08:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing me to WP:NOTBROKEN. I remember when people insisted to avoid all redirects but it was years ago and I see that things have changed since then. I'll keep that in mind. Thanks and best regards. —Rafał Pocztarski, Rfl ( talk | contribs) 19:20, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry I couldn't be of any help. @
Chealer didn't seem to be interested in providing a concise viewpoint or participating in the process. With this being the case, I doubt a third opinion would have been any help.
I hope this can be resolved as you both continue to have a
discussion. If not perhaps another route of
dispute resolution would be more helpful.
Anyhow, I've enjoyed the correspondence I've had with you, and hope it all works out.
—
Lightgodsy(
TALK
CONT) 09:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Linux distribution shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Suggesting that the behavior of other editors constitutes "trolling" may be interpreted as a personal attack. Working towards a resolution usually yields better results. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. -- Chealer ( talk) 02:43, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for nothing, and there you go. — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 02:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic (whoever you are...)
The PC/104 Consortium's Specifications are FREE...- not like PICMG and others, but currently (and getting this changed is effort by the Board of Directors, as a change to the byelaws!) they require a REGISTRATION.
You have actually uploaded a document that you are not really allowed to share, but I can't be bothered to change this - AGAIN!
I also do not really agree that HyperLink to a HISTORIAL - for PC/104 - important person, like Rick is "SPAM", but then I am a newbie to Wiki edits.
I only landed on the PC/104 Wiki page by mistake. However, it would make sense to spend some more time on this. You seems to be interested in PC/104, so would you possible be interested in adding more information to this??
All the best
Flemming@Sundance ( talk) 09:46, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Flemming Christensen Flemming.C@Sundance.com Managing Director Tel: +44 7 850 911 417 Skype: Flemming_Sundance Web: www.sundance.com
Sundance Multiprocessor Technology is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 2440991. Registered office: Chiltern House, Waterside, Chesham, Bucks, HP5 1PS, England
I got all busy down a twisty road, in the cold, cold world of raw encyclopedic maintenance, and I forgot all about what a wonderful person you are. You deserve some kindness, and to never question whether your overall efforts are admired and appreciated.
— Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 11:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I was glad to be able to help you the other day. If you don't mind returning the favor, I made a call for comments over at List of distributed computing projects. Thanks for any input you're willing to provide! – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 05:59, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You asked why assembly language was delinked in Microcode. I gave the reason in my edit summary, WP:OVERLINK, because it already has a link further up the article in the "The reason for microprogramming" section. - Lopifalko ( talk)
Please have a look at Talk:Dd (Unix) § Non encyclopedical text in section Data recovery and check the remarks about the content about the "Data recovery" section as you have been a co-author of that section. Schily ( talk) 15:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The other OSes aren't listed below. The example is OS only, DOS is similar, but CMS is different, IIRC. Peter Flass ( talk) 17:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
If you are not that busy, if you think it worthy answering me. So would please tell me why you think Transmeta should be sorted with Pentium 4? Of course I believe that you have enough reasons. Computerfaner ( talk) 12:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
OK, I've return that table to its previous revision with modifications from Guy Harris. Yeah, this time is fare for everyone to make a new start. Thank you for your response, and you are free to deal with it on your own behalf. Computerfaner ( talk) 12:58, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up my language. One thing I've seen done (required?): "[m]obile.." vs. "Mobile.." or "mobile".
"It might be better to leave out such comparisons and stay with as neutral statements as possible", I assume you mean ×4 and ×3. I'm just not sure people realize this. What I really want to include is someone saying Android's installed base is more than all others, not just more popular in a given year. Given these numbers it probably is but no one checks. Just comparing is not, not neutral I think, and allowed "basic calculations". Based on the next previous source. Not sure I should make a big deal of this, posting here and not at the talk page. comp.arch ( talk) 11:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
For your numerous citation contributions to RAID, Standard RAID levels, Nested RAID levels, Non-standard RAID levels, and Non-RAID drive architectures, as well as your energetic copy-editing of those articles, I gladly award you the Editor's Barnstar! Way to go and keep up the good work! – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 06:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC) |
Hey Dsimic, I created the pages GNU Guix and Guix System Distribution. Do mind contributing to them when you get a chance? -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 13:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
You say that BIOS is "clearly an initialism." But the OED says that an initialism has "each letter...pronounced separately" which is not true of BIOS. Even if there are definitions of "initialism" that do not require that, there is still an ambiguity between those definitions and the OED definition. The word "acronym" has no such ambiguity and is thus superior. -- Jtle515 ( talk) 01:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
My friend; You might not like what I have added but (as I've said with my last edit). I appreciate very much if we discuss first at the talk page and you edit later. Please undo your last editing and lets discuss; That's how things are done here at WP right? ;-) Pxe 213 37 84 214 ( talk) 14:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I fixed File:ATX PS signals.svg drawing. It is shown in ATX and Power supply unit (computer) in English Wikipedia. It took me numerous hours to fix it, since it was the first time I used a SVG editor. I listed detailed changes in the photo upload history. Anyway, I noticed that you previously edited these articles, thus is why I'm letting you know. If you see any technical mistakes, please let me know. You don't need to reply nor contact me, unless there are problems. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi.
I think I should let a few (hopefully) interested editors, such as yourself, know about Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 31 § Microsoft Office 2016 because the RfD tag was deleted and the discussion is about to be closed in a day.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 04:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that a beginner user (Gelmo96) was edited the page Dhcp and now you are reverted his editing. Perhaps the procedure followed by Gelmo96 is not correct, but reading the textual content of the page Dhcp you can see that every DHCP message has the broadcast destination (Dest=255.255.255.255) although in the image file:DHCP_session_en.svg some messages are "unicast". Thanks for your kind help. Fabuio ( talk) 20:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
File:
pages, and they can be created manually. However, this only works where there is no file of that name (if there is a file, any uses of the redirect show the redirect's file, and not the target file -
Bugzilla:14928).Thanks to User:Dsimic for the research. I removed the labels and uploaded a new version of the file. I object to deleting my original work because the proposed replacement slaps a CC-SA license over a minor modification of my PD-licensed original. While that is legally OK, I find it unethical (because of the attempt to remove the more liberally licensed original) and want to keep the PD-licensed file accessible. ~~ helix84 14:21, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that " Comparison of current ARM cores" is a subset of " Comparison of ARMv7-A cores", except for the ARM11 column, thus I consider it redundant and put in a request to DELETE the " Comparison of current ARM cores" article. If you are interested, please comment at " Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of current ARM cores". Thanks in advance. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 20:40, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I believe your recent edits to the article shingled magnetic recording go against the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Specifically:
I would like consensus to be reached about these edits. I side with the MoS as outlined above. IsaacAA ( talk) 14:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
There seems to be an edit war going on user. Kapibada is adamant that 5.1 is unofficial however does not give any significant proof that it is unofficial. I will re-add 5.1 segment. Looking for your advise as you seem to manage that page for long. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debasish Dey ( talk • contribs) 21:46, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Sounds better. Peter Flass ( talk) 13:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
I reverted your
again. As I explained in my previous edit summary, per
MOS:SERIAL, articles should be internally consistent in their use (or disuse) of the serial comma. There's no ambiguity in the original wording that would necessitate a serial comma, so your change does not make the article "better" or "more readable" in any way. In essence, you're changing that sentence from one style to another based on nothing but your own personal preference, which is expressly forbidden by
WP:MOS.
If you wish to make a case for the use of a serial comma in that sentence, please do so here (or on the article's talk page, if you wish). Re-doing an edit after it gets reverted is strongly discouraged (
WP:BRD).
Regards,
Indrek (
talk) 23:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic, Re [4], you asked me to read User talk:Dsimic#Piped links. So your justification for making that edit is that both Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) and I disagree with you, and there's no basis in policy or guideline?! (In fact, articles often suffer with unpiped links incorrectly using a capitalised link, so it is a common thing to fix when unpiped, and a piped one is no justification for using the incorrect case). Because it's so obvious there's no consensus for the principle you believe in, but it is too trivial to edit war over, I suggest you reflect on the sound justification for using the correct case for links that Chris and I agree on, appreciate that the tone is harsh but appropriate, and try to refrain. Keep up the other good work, regards Widefox; talk 11:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Dsimic, I have noticed you were contributing to the post "host card emulation". So thank you as you have helped clean up the post. However, there has been a recent onslaught on the post by a few individuals that seem to really want to promote a company called "CardsApp". I am not as well versed in wikipedia posts as you so I was hoping you could help clear this page up and return it to a previous version where "CardsApp" is not doing self promotion.
Kindly, Theodore9dw ( talk) 06:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Dear Dragan,
you use Wikiviewstats for calculating viewership of your articles. As I know, this tool is offline since months. How have you used it for Feb '15 data?-- Kopiersperre ( talk) 17:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Processing Address generation unit: done. (total 739 views)
Processing UniDIMM: done. (total 1,580 views)
Processing kdump (Linux): done. (total 861 views)
Processing kernfs (BSD): done. (total 220 views)
Processing kernfs (Linux): done. (total 649 views)
Processing ftrace: done. (total 919 views)
Processing Android Runtime: done. (total 10,933 views)
Processing WebScaleSQL: done. (total 802 views)
Processing HipHop Virtual Machine: done. (total 5,003 views)
Processing kpatch: done. (total 1,314 views)
Processing kGraft: done. (total 1,094 views)
Processing CoreOS: done. (total 9,104 views)
Processing ARM Cortex-A17: done. (total 2,167 views)
Processing Port Control Protocol: done. (total 1,174 views)
Processing zswap: done. (total 959 views)
Processing Emdebian Grip: done. (total 324 views)
Processing ThinkPad 8: done. (total 468 views)
Processing Laravel: done. (total 9,352 views)
Processing OpenLMI: done. (total 382 views)
Processing Open vSwitch: done. (total 3,384 views)
Processing Distributed Overlay Virtual Ethernet: done. (total 457 views)
Processing Management Component Transport Protocol: done. (total 562 views)
Processing Buildroot: done. (total 784 views)
Processing dm-cache: done. (total 1,899 views)
Processing bcache: done. (total 1,291 views)
Processing SATA Express: done. (total 14,692 views)
Processing OpenZFS: done. (total 1,511 views)
Processing List of Eurocrem packages: done. (total 120 views)
Processing M.2: done. (total 36,447 views)
Processing Eurocrem: done. (total 702 views)
Stats fetched for February 2015: total 109,893 views, 3,924 views per day (28 days in month).
<syntaxhighlight lang="php">
and </syntaxhighlight>
) and paste it into a file – that's the latest version of the actual program code. :) The current version might work too slowly when fetching statistics for 750 articles, so please let me know how fast it works once you get it going – it should be possible to make it much faster by using
HTTP pipelining through
curl_multi_exec()
. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 11:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)Fetching statistics data: ... done.
- Address generation unit: total 739 views
- UniDIMM: total 1,580 views
- kdump (Linux): total 861 views
- kernfs (BSD): total 220 views
- kernfs (Linux): total 649 views
- ftrace: total 919 views
- Android Runtime: total 10,933 views
- WebScaleSQL: total 802 views
- HipHop Virtual Machine: total 5,003 views
- kpatch: total 1,314 views
- kGraft: total 1,094 views
- CoreOS: total 9,104 views
- ARM Cortex-A17: total 2,167 views
- Port Control Protocol: total 1,174 views
- zswap: total 959 views
- Emdebian Grip: total 324 views
- ThinkPad 8: total 468 views
- Laravel: total 9,352 views
- OpenLMI: total 382 views
- Open vSwitch: total 3,384 views
- Distributed Overlay Virtual Ethernet: total 457 views
- Management Component Transport Protocol: total 562 views
- Buildroot: total 784 views
- dm-cache: total 1,899 views
- bcache: total 1,291 views
- SATA Express: total 14,692 views
- OpenZFS: total 1,511 views
- List of Eurocrem packages: total 120 views
- M.2: total 36,447 views
- Eurocrem: total 702 views
Done, February 2015 statistics for 30 articles fetched in 1 second.
Total 109,893 views, averaging in 3,924 views per day (28 days in that month).
Done, February 2015 statistics for 144 articles fetched in 14 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 618 articles.
curl_multi_setopt($handles, CURLMOPT_PIPELINING, 0);
and curl_multi_setopt($handles, CURLMOPT_PIPELINING, 1);
on line 72? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 15:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)CURLMOPT_PIPELINING=true:
[..]
> Russian Chemical Reviews: fetching data FAILED!
> Tricyclazol: fetching data FAILED!
Done, February 2015 statistics for 246 articles fetched in 16 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 516 articles.
CURLMOPT_PIPELINING=0:
[...]
> Josiphos: fetching data FAILED!
> Carteolol: fetching data FAILED!
Done, February 2015 statistics for 263 articles fetched in 20 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 499 articles.
CURLMOPT_PIPELINING=1:
[...]
> Chevron Phillips: fetching data FAILED!
> 2-Methylbenzylchlorid: fetching data FAILED!
Done, February 2015 statistics for 263 articles fetched in 13 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 499 articles.
Mysterious-- Kopiersperre ( talk) 16:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
> ftrace: failure (Could not resolve host: staats.grok.se)
> OpenZFS: failure (Could not resolve host: staats.grok.se)
> kernfs (Linux): failure (Could not resolve host: staats.grok.se)
> Eurocrem: failure (Protocol "hhttp" not supported or disabled in libcurl)
> dm-cache: failure (Protocol "hhttp" not supported or disabled in libcurl)
[..]
- Leptophos: total 10 views
- Journal of Polymer Science: total 7 views
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Dimepiperat: failure ()
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Maleimid: failure ()
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Nicosulfuron: failure ()
> Tetraethylenpentamin: failure ()
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Dichlon: failure ()
[many undefined offsets]
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Chanda: failure ()
> 10,10′-Oxybisphenoxoarsin: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Dichlormid: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Benoxacor: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> International Journal of Medical Microbiology: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Thidiazuron: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Refratechnik: failure (Connection timed out after 10001 milliseconds)
[other 10001 ms timeouts]
> Befehl Nr. 227: failure (Connection timed out after 10000 milliseconds)
[other 10000 ms timeouts]
> Dimethylchlorsilan: failure (Connection time-out)
> Lothar Kühne: failure (Connection time-out)
> Cytec: failure (Connection time-out)
> Tributylmethylammoniummethylsulfat: failure (Connection time-out)
> Alexander Tamanjan: failure (Connection time-out)
[..]
/
not to be URL-encoded as %2F
. Got that fixed in a
new version, I'd appreciate if you could test it out. Also, this version implements easier selection of the encyclopedia/language for all specified articles. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 15:56, 8 March 2015 (UTC)I created a proposal for moving Yahoo! to Yahoo. If you have a minute, we'd appreciate your input. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 09:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dragan, remember Intelligent Memory and the ECC DRAM discussion we had?
Now I just noticed you also handle the Wikipedia entey for the Broadwell architecture. Per Intel specs the Broadwell-U only supports max 16GB of memory by two memory slots (8GB per memory module). But there is an internal Intel document that explains how this can be doubled. The memory has to fulfill special requirements for that, because the Broadwell-U internal memory controller has a little "bug". A standard memory module with 16GB could be unstable. Intelligent Memory has the first 16GB modules that work in all the new notebooks and laptops that are now coming to the market and use the i3/i5/i7-5xxxU CPUs.
On the Wikipedia page about the Broadwell I find nothing about the memory-support, but maybe you have good reason for that!? One reason could be that the Broadwell-U has the chipset and the CPU together on one SOC, while other Broadwells separate that. The memory support depends on the chipset. Am I right? If that is correct then adding something about the memory-support of the Broadwell-U might be too complex or confusing for readers. Twmemphis ( talk) 16:17, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
If you have time, can you offer an opinion or evaluation about the 209.6.201.191's message in User talk:Donner60 § IceCream Apps is spam. I replied about general editing guidelines but I really don't have the expertise to evaluate the complaint about the existing article as being spam. I had reverted the edit because the IP user had replaced general language with extremely negative language. Perhaps some of the complaint has merit but the language and type of edit needed to be reverted. If you don't have time or interest for this, no problem. Donner60 ( talk) 01:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
Third-party}}
. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 08:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Hi. You reverted some changes to Docker (software) where " [ sic]" was removed from after "on premise" in a quote. I wanted to justify the removal and see if it might change your mind. (It's a small thing and doesn't matter to me either way, so feel free to ignore me.) Checking Google Ngram Viewer, the use of "on premise" seems on the rise. A cursory glance at books using "on premise" shows it's used in the same sense as "on premises". It's also a common phrasing in cloud computing contexts. Yes, I'm aware prescriptivists say it's not grammatically correct, but that's beside the point. " [ sic]" is used to proactively deny a transcription error has occurred, but is unnecessary if there's no reason for that assumption. I'm trying to argue that (given the context and rising usage of the phrase) there is no reason for readers to assume there has been a transcription error, and thus " [ sic]" may be safely removed. 128.205.39.37 ( talk) 16:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
This is a very-long-ongoing issue of a banned user. It's a wp:deny effort. No issue here with you or others undoing my reverts. See User:Arthur Rubin/IP list and the current discussion on Arthur Rubin. Many edits are OK, though often strange, if not bizarre, such as linking the British Pound symbol "£", or New Zealand while ignoring other countries. It's OCD v. OCD! Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 07:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I consistently see you around computer related articles (and that one third opinion) and would be interested in your opinion on this deletion discussion, if you'd care to give one there. — Lightgodsy( TALK CONT) 23:06, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, most of people refers to the operating systems based on Linux kernel as Linux. however Linux is just a kernel, a piece of code written by a finnish guy with contributions of many people around the world, to make any OS able to use a lot of devices. it is true that the operating systems based on Linux belongs to the Linux family of operating systems as cited there: /info/en/?search=MOS:LINUX#Linux_vs._GNU.2FLinux, but that doesnt mean that Linux is a real entire OS. many geeks know that Linux is a kernel and dont say that it is an OS. for example GNU is the most free OS used today which missed a kernel and than gets combined with Linux: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html.
When you say that you use Linux when you use a Linux based system like GNU or Android, you mean then that the Linux developers has written the entire OS and released its binaries and all the applications running in the system, which is wrong. Debian GNU/Linux is an OS, Android is too, Chromium also. Please stop writing wrong informations about operating systems, that affects the knowledge of many people which is not nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kb333 ( talk • contribs) 14:22, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Can you have a look at this redirect. We have an editor who seems to be trying to turn it into a very COI/POV article against consensus. - Ahunt ( talk) 14:45, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
R from incorrect name}}
. Hope you agree with the tagging. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 15:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)By my count you haven't broken 3RR but you should be aware of the report I filed at ANEW. BethNaught ( talk) 18:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Dear Dragan, you probably already know about this, but when you have a chance, please check out the additions to the "Criticism and comment" section of Deep learning and the article referenced therein -- I would rather that my friends take the first shots at all of this! And be sure to take a look at the first footnote of the article proper. Synchronist ( talk) 23:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
First of all thanks for editing my post. I am fairly new to wikipedia so accept my apologies if what I am asking is obvious. Can you please let me know why did you change the title of my post "ARMOR: A Hardware Solution to Prevent Row Hammer Error" to "A Run-time Memory hot-row detectOR"? I believe the first title gives more information to the user who is looking for a solution to this phenomenon. Also, you changed the link directly to the solution page rather than home page. Can you please explain the reason?
Regards, Mohsen Ghasempour ( talk) 19:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey man maybe you can give me your opinion on this clarity/redundancy goal on an edit, see Talk:LAMP (software bundle)#Discussion of how to refer to LAMP. makeswell ( talk) 01:01, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
You obviously have good ideas but I'd say this time, it didn't quite cut it. IMHO, "Required sources" is not a suitable title for a subsection of "Avoid common mistakes". It implies that providing sources is the mistake; but we should say the reverse: Forgetting to provide sources is the mistake. (The original title was "not providing sources".)
But one of your other edits was so good that I imitated it in another section. And your edit in the x86 was in fact good, even though I changed the section, because it made me realize new things. Cheers. Fleet Command ( talk) 08:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
You recently undid some of my edits removing ipsec.pl references. The references are being used as a form of self promotion, the site in question is operated and written by the editor that added them to the articles. The links he is adding the write ups to notability and frankly the information he is linking to is poorly done, hence my reasons for removing them. Offnfopt (talk) 06:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi.
Do you know of any computer-related publication called "PC home Advanced"? I suspect it is a typo but I don't know what could be the correct form.
If you want a little background, this is mentioned in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IZArc (2nd nomination) as an evidence to keep the article.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 17:51, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Dragan, it's me, Glenn! (BTW, I read your article on distributed data base systems -- some solid work!! -- and have gleaned from it your gmail address, which I am obviously not using at the moment.) At any rate, I have set a trap for Big Foot! See my user page for the fun . . . Synchronist ( talk) 05:24, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank You, this edit requires to click the diagrams. I suggest to undo it to keep the diagrams visible without a click. See the German version "Deutsch" of the article where it was possible to lineup 2 images or a gallery with the option called "floating" at the right side. The help:gallery_tag and help:pictures do not address how to do this. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 20:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Multiple image}}
template. The reason why
I've moved all images into a gallery is simply because there are four images in the relatively short
Power supply unit (computer) § Functions section, and that's pretty much the only way to keep the section layout reasonably clean. However,
this layout change should present some kind of a compromise, increasing the size of thumbnails while keeping all four images in a gallery. Hope you agree. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 22:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC){{
Multiple image}}
was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you! I guess, it is soved
[6] and You have a higher resolution on your screen than my one, so please review. --Hans Haase (
有问题吗) 11:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)Hi, Dsimic. I was wondering what reference errors the Python example that I added to the documentation for Infobox programming language introduced. Because I didn't see any reference errors when I was changing the infobox, and I'm pretty sure I would've spot them if there were any reference errors. Also, the Scheme example felt kind of outdated, and I just thought that the example needed an update. Thanks. Kamran Mackey ( talk) 01:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Infobox programming language}}
's documentation? However, if you insist, I can live with the Python infobox example. Speaking of the reference errors, as you've already noted in
your edit summary (and what's nicely visible in
this diff), it was about having undefined named reference tags that caused a number of messages in red at the bottom of the page, which are clearly visible in
this revision. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 02:07, 8 May 2015 (UTC)Hi Dragan, after updating the Linux Storage Stack Diagram, I've found now that you put quite much effort in correcting typos in the former old version of the diagram (I've found the discussion at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop/Archive/Apr 2015 § A high-level overview of the Linux kernel's I/O stack). Thank you for your work here! We plan to update the diagram to Kernel 4.0 in the next 2 weeks, I'll include your feedback there. Best regards, Wfischer ( talk) 09:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Peripheral devices do not "primarily interact with humans". Anything outside of the CPU and main memory is considered a peripheral device. This includes hard disk drives and tape drives. Note the wording in the standard, quoted in the section on ATA-2. Jeh ( talk) 19:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Why did you revert my change at USB Type-C when a section named "USB Type-C" of the redirect's target exists? Someone added the section to page USB last month. At the time you created USB Type-C as a redirect, it was not there. I redirected to USB#USB Type-C so that readers could focus directly on USB Type-C. I also moved the anchor TYPE-C to the section, in which I placed {{Anchor|USB Type-C}} inside. I have already checked the edit history of the redirect page before I updated the redirect. Give reason for reverting other than to repeatedly say Explicit anchors are preferred, as they stay effective even if sections are renamed in your edit summary. -- 24.6.161.63 ( talk) 23:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Anchor}}
template) are much better in redirects than section titles. If the article sections are renamed later, split into two or more (sub)sections or altered in another way, explicit anchors are moved to appropriate new positions in the article (exactly as
you did it after
USB § USB type-C subsection has been split off from
USB § USB 3.1), with already existing redirects still working without requiring any changes to them.====={{Anchor|TYPE-C}}USB type-C=====
. The "TYPE-C" anchor seems to be customary by you, but you are not only one that prefers this. I notice that another editor created a redirect as
USB#TYPE-C at page
Type-C. I mean the text USB#TYPE-C.<!-- Some redirects point here, do not modify. -->
right below the sections such redirects point to. That's simply wrong, as nobody knows later how many such redirects are there in case such sections need to be renamed, and that requires digging through the "what links here" to keep such redirects working. In other words, IMHO things people do naturally are not necessarily the best things to do.{{
Anchor}}
template, instead of the anchors implicitly created as a result of placing section headings. Maybe that wouldn't be everyone's choice of a modifier, but it seems logical to me: implicitly means that something hasn't been required explicitly. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 22:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC){{Anchor|TYPE-C}}
text would appear between /* and */ (which renders section linking) in edit summaries. It is undesirable, unlike tags such as <this>. The page should redirect directly to a section currently named "USB type-C", not "TYPE-C", which I think is too broad. It is unclear to me whether the capitalized term most commonly refers to a new type of USB. --
24.6.161.63 (
talk) 23:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)/* {{Anchor|PD|PD-R1.0|PD-R1.0V1.1|PD-R1.0V1.2|PD-R2.0V1.0}}USB Power Delivery */ The devices have increased power requirements, not increased energy requirements, fixed error.
generates "
→{{Anchor|PD|PD-R1.0|PD-R1.0V1.1|PD-R1.0V1.2|PD-R2.0V1.0}}USB Power Delivery: The devices have increased power requirements, not increased energy requirements, fixed error." in edit summary. Clicking the "→" will take us to that section, but there is no such section called "{{Anchor|PD|PD-R1.0|PD-R1.0V1.1|PD-R1.0V1.2|PD-R2.0V1.0}}USB Power Delivery" in the USB article. (
diff link) That is what it is broken if the section is in fact "USB Power Delivery". Regarding one of your edits to the USB article, did you actuallly delete the part of "{{Anchor|TYPE-C))" in edit summary when you edited the section "USB Type-C", in
this diff? --
24.6.161.63 (
talk) 06:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)I added this cause it is not a simple closed 1x connector and the photo quality is better than the present one. Somebody disrupted the description and the you removed it. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 21:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Not to discredit your efforts, you totally missed the point, i.e., education of newbies. The frames of a motion picture were included to explain the multitasking concept to newbies who are likely to misconstrue the term multitasking, said term often being interpreted as simultaneous, e.g., texting and driving, in the popular media. The CPU, no matter how configured, must interleave chunks of multiple processes. Just as a camera switching back-and-forth between incomplete scenes will.
Note: My object is to make the concept clear and comprehensible, not to impress fellow IT professionals with recondite distillations of fact. For a professional who does not need it, your definition suffices. However for a newbie, it's too tight, and self-contradictory, even. That said, I'm butting out, as you've made quite a spectacular effort at various corrections, and I honestly don't have the time to engage. We'll go with your edit. But it, no offense, could be better. 99.246.121.36 ( talk) 00:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for diff 663477834. Please, check the global edits of the user, this was massive change in several wikis (I fixed ru: and de:) - [7] a5b ( talk) 02:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic! I did partially revert your changes to Standard RAID levels and Nested RAID levels. I do not see that use of the {{ n/a}} template as being the intended use, since in neither table are the cells actually not applicable.
If your concern is that the {{ Depends}} and {{ Unknown}} templates are too boldly formatted, I happen to agree with you. However, I don't agree that the appropriate fix is hacks or manual cell formatting on the article side; rather, the template should be changed (with discussion, of course) so that your concern is addressed globally, and consistently. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 20:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Depends}}
and {{
Unknown}}
templates is much better than
"customizing" the {{
n/a}}
template. However, those two templates might benefit from a modification that would make them stand out less, which applies especially to the {{
Unknown}}
template that makes the table in
Nested RAID levels § Comparison section look almost funny. Though, that might be just up to the table being almost empty? Perhaps the {{
Unknown}}
template actually looks good in tables with only a few empty cells, where its visual appeal is actually desirable, so it shouldn't be modified at all? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 21:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Current look | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
---|---|---|---|---|
Proposal #1 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
Proposal #2 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
{{
Dunno}}
makes the table look much less "busy". I've been thinking more about those templates, and it might actually be good to have a little bit more "flashy" {{
Unknown}}
template so it actually draws attention of people who might actually fill in the voids. That way, once the empty cells in
Nested RAID levels § Comparison section lose their majority status, we might actually want to go back to {{
Unknown}}
.{{
Yes}}
, {{
No}}
, {{
Good}}
or {{
Bad}}
, as visible in
Template:n/a § Templates, for example) so turning the text in the only exception (which is {{
n/a}}
) into black might be actually more feasible. Thoughts? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 11:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC)Proposal #3 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
---|
{{
Depends}}
is actually a possible answer, whereas {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
are for cells in need of answers, and {{
n/a}}
is for cells that will never receive an answer. Therefore, I would vote for graying-out {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
as is shown in proposal #3, yet leaving {{
Depends}}
and {{
n/a}}
as is. We might make {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
<small>
to further lessen their busyness.{{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
serve the same purpose. I would support a merging these redundant templates. One would simply be redirected to the other to keep existing code working. –
voidxor (
talk |
contrib) 23:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Proposal #4 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
---|---|---|---|---|
Proposal #5 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
Proposal #6 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
{{
n/a}}
should have its label in black (as visible in the proposal #4), as that template represents pretty much a definitive answer: "not applicable" or "not available" (for the latter, in the sense of "no such thing", not "unknown"). How about that? Of course, I'd support the merger between {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
templates. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 23:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC){{
Dunno}}
/{{
Unknown}}
is that the latter can be answered. However, I don't really care if {{
n/a}}
uses black text or gray. I feel much more strongly that {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
could stand to be merged, grayed out, and made <small>
. The appropriate place for such a discussion appears to be
Template talk:Table cell templates. I'll let you make the proposals, after which I will vote. It might be wise to reference this discussion in your proposal, so that we disclose our working together and brainstorming beforehand. –
voidxor (
talk |
contrib) 05:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC){{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
, a thought about why the merger might not be favorable just crossed my mind: different cell widths. In other words, having two templates that produce "fill me in" cells with labels of completely different widths might actually be good so the narrow one can be used where the space is tight, and the wide (and more descriptive) one where the space isn't an issue; that's somewhat similar to how
MOS:DATEFORMAT allows month names to be abbreviated in tables. Also, here are the proposals #5 and #6 above, which show how those two templates look with <small>
, and to me they look much better that way.Dear Dragan: given my established interest in a re-integration of art and technology, I've started an article on the ShareSpace foundation. Should be interesting to see how it's received. Synchronist ( talk) 04:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I noticed my input on performance improvement was undone. Could you please clarify and advise so I can update it so that it is acceptable? Thanks Rob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robpater ( talk • contribs) 01:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
There are no run levels in most modern Linux anymore so the "Default runlevels" should be trimmed down (the edit you reverted) or marked as historical. Please let me know your thoughts.-- Tim ( talk) 14:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry for the edit conflicts caused. I need to be offline for a while. I'll catch up with the discussion later. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 23:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Flexible_array_member&curid=44866380&diff=663078633&oldid=659100780
The value is: it avoids people telling "but it _does_ work in c++!!!" (because their gcc accepts it). Sources? Well, I just found something about "zero length arrays" as a GNU extension for pre-99 C. It does not mention C++ for this feature. :-( -- RokerHRO ( talk) 15:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dismic: U recently added to the HDD External Links section three articles covering quite low level HDD technical details. There are hundreds of such articles going back many years so I wonder if such detail is appropriate for Wikipedia? If so, where do we stop? Didn't want to just revert without talking - yr call. Tom94022 ( talk) 17:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Deleting OCaml software category wasn't justified IMO. Look here: https://github.com/facebook/hhvm/tree/master/hphp/hack/src. It's almost entirely written in OCaml and that category is specifically for such cases. 89.42.64.133 ( talk) 10:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
@
-prefixed warning-generating "soft" parameter or return type annotations into regular annotations that generate recoverable errors:
Hello, we noticed you have edited lots of the storage pages (M.2, SATA Express) and wanted to give you the inside scoop on U.2 and enlist your help to make the wikipedia page great! I started a draft U.2 (SFF-8639) page that is in review by Wikipedia. I don't really know what I'm doing on Wikipedia though. I am the product marketing manager for Intel's data center SSDs, and have been driving the direction of the storage market. You can see my knowledge of storage ecosystem here: http://www.nvmexpress.org/presentations/
News on U.2: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/sff-8639-u.2-pcie-ssd-nvme,29321.html
Any way to expedite the process of review so we can start editing it up? I also have no clue how to upload pictures.
You can reach out to me on LinkedIn if that works for my email. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmhands ( talk • contribs) 00:21, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Articles for creation! We are a group of editors who work together on the Articles for creation and Files for upload pages.
A few tips that you might find helpful:
Once again, welcome to the project. Anastasia [Missionedit] ( talk) 21:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Dragan, the entirety of my contribution to Deep learning was removed two days ago (see /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/99.42.64.25 ), and the only reason I mention it to you is because I'm not sure this action was on the "up and up". But if you don't have the time to take a look, I'll see if maybe QWERTYUS can step in. Ironically, this removal of material linking art and AI comes at a time when there is a huge new burst of interest in the subject; see, for example http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/18/google-image-recognition-neural-network-androids-dream-electric-sheep. Synchronist ( talk) 03:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
Diff}}
template to have a link like
this one. It is also advisable to always provide brief
edit summaries; for example,
this edit would benefit from a brief description. Hope you agree. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 05:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)Can you read what your placing Not only inaccuracies but anything true stated in devious misleading manner. Did you just copy it from somewhere? If you are not intentionally doing what I have stated above. Slow down and Read what I have summited and see if you really have understood how to state what's going on When represent signed numbers (grade school + or - integers) by what are integers in this S_N_R. Michael Ali theturk ( talk) 07:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for planning on adding more references! I appreciate it, it'll measurably improve the article. -- Yamla ( talk) 19:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dragan,
The Virtual machine was a mash of 2 distinct concepts, with essentially no overlap: system virtual machine (OS virtualization etc.) and process virtual machine (JVM etc.). Thus I split them into two articles, and was in the process of cleaning them up. Shall we discuss at the article talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbarth ( talk • contribs) 17:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Discussion on the talk page could improve the article (better than reverting mindlessly). If you find that quality adjusted price information from the Federal Reserve Board is in wrong section, I thing that moving it to the right section would help. 71.128.35.13 ( talk) 22:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello - I got a notice that said User:217IP was patrolled by Dsimic. Could you clarify what this means? I am unfamiliar with it in the context of users - normally people patrol pages for changes. Thanks! 217IP ( talk) 15:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
You have deleted several mentions of Kaby Lake because it is a rumor. However, you have not deleted all the additions of 670221421 ("Cannonlake ... put on hold indefinitely") and 670668783. Please be consistent. Also, I do not understand the comment of 670598820. What is the complete sentence? Especially, what "doesn't fit" with what? Visite fortuitement prolongée ( talk) 19:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Blade (templating engine). Since you had some involvement with the Blade (templating engine) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Compassionate727 ( talk) 19:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Run-time polymorphism, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo, or other unlikely search term.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that
administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{
hangon}}
to the page and state your intention on the article's
talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
Compassionate727 (
talk) 19:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
{{
R with possibilities}}
when there simply isn't enough encyclopedic content available to justify separate articles? That isn't helpful. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 20:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Hi. This is Codename Lisa! I missed you during my absence. How do you do?
If it isn't much trouble, could you please take a look at the move discussion in Talk:Virtual disk? I feel it needs more contributors and I have already tried all channels of notification short of inviting interested parties. (Hopefully, you count as a potentially interested one.)
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 07:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
What's the general or your personal gain, if you remove example use paragraphs such as mine from the ipkg article? It was far away from being a HOWTO. And is it really, really necessary to eliminate such paragraphs? I personally find it really convenient to have almost everything I need in a wikipedia article. You are not going to cut down the wikipedia to exactly your need, are you? -- johayek ( talk) 12:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Minor redirects aren't bolded in WP:R#PLA. Widefox; talk 23:33, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
The Half Barnstar | |
For your cooperation with other editors while contributing to Wikipedia. I have seen many editors squabbling over minor edits. You are different. It seems to me that you focus your energy on improving Wikipedia rather than socializing. We need more people like you here. Keep up the good work. Chamith (talk) 12:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, I've undone your undo of my edit. Please stop doing that. I've unified the reference style on that article. I can assure you that no one is reading the references in the source of the articles. Thank you, Dawnseeker2000 14:23, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect PU2RC. Since you had some involvement with the PU2RC redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Sanpitch ( talk) 14:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I saw that you undid
675603800 on the Shellshock article:
Undid revision 675603800 by Regagain (talk) Those capable of producing patches and applying them on their own would be rather advanced developers, not ordinary users
I agree with you, however, I still think the current wording of this sentence is misleading, and even wrong. For the record, here's the quote from the
source:
If you're an advanced enough user to have enabled the types of services that can be exploited by Shellshock, you're also likely advanced enough to turn those services off for now, or to patch bash yourself using Xcode.
Compare that with the sentence as it is right now:
Such advanced users are typically capable of turning the services off until a patch built using Xcode can be implemented.
It does not mean the same thing at all. I think we should update it to something like:
Such advanced users are typically capable of turning the services off until an updated is available.
Do you agree (or do you have a better suggestion? :-))
Regagain (
talk) 17:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello. You created Bay Trail (microarchitecture) sometime ago. According to the current version of Atom (system on chip), Bay Trail is a platform for the Valleyview chip. Visite fortuitement prolongée ( talk) 12:32, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
About this edit, I just used a script that does this all the time.. Must be ok? If you're right the script needs to be changed. Unless I'm sure you're right, I'll not be cleaning up after the script.. I might if I heard a logical/good reason.. Doesn't seem to matter much. comp.arch ( talk) 09:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Shellshock_(software_bug)&oldid=676626126&diff=prev - actually, the reference is right after this sentence - just press ctr+f and enter "american" or "afl-fuzz". Do you still have anything against this edit? Deetah ( talk) 10:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
You are one of the most extreme editors on Wikipedia. Instead of shortening the exteneded list a little (and not just to your own need) you are inconsiderately and simply reverting my contribution a little like a tyrant. Why don't you rename the article to "Dsimic's article on dynamic linking"? Who are you? A ingenious smart-ass professor in Computer Science?-- johayek ( talk) 12:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Could you please see bottom of those pages:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.223.130.175 ( talk) 14:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Could you have a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing#Help with merge. Someone seems about to do a copy-and-paste merge of Prefetch buffer into DRAM. Copy-and-paste merges are nearly always a bad idea and in this case the AfD outcome of a "merge" looks like an unwise conclusion to me at best. — Ruud 16:15, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
In reply to this revert. In general I agree with you, but please see the edits made by this user: Special:Contributions/Zhanghaohit. This is a single-purpose account only promoting their own publications, often adding multiple links to the same article. This is a textbook example of WP:REFSPAM and should not be tolerated. -- intgr [talk] 08:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Please can you go and check the Device file article again and remove the unbalanced tag you added? As I’ve explained (again) on the Talk page for that article, Linux really does behave the same as traditional UNIX; the only difference is that, by default, it only creates block devices for disks (just as FreeBSD only creates character devices). The only Linux-specific aspect other than that is that, because character device behaviour is genuinely useful for disks, the Linux kernel added an O_DIRECT flag that you can use to open one of its block devices in raw mode (i.e. as if it was a character device). Well, that and the existence of the raw driver, which lets you explicitly create character devices for the benefit of software that doesn’t know about O_DIRECT. I’ve added coverage of those facts to the article, as well as a remark about the use of the term "raw device" (e.g. in the Solaris manuals) to refer to character devices; I’m pretty certain this addresses your concern about balance. – Ajhoughton ( talk) 16:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Jerod Lycett ( talk) 16:40, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Antarctic krill | |
Penguins eat krill! (and some fish and squids) Kıverti qwerty ( talk) 12:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC) |
Erm, re edits like this [8]. The syntax of my edit [9] was generated - so I suggest you take your "fix" up with the edit icon bar developers. The stats indicate that [10] we edit many similar articles. In fact, your edits are often closely following mine to the extent that I'm starting to feel that your edits are following my edits a bit too closely (see WP:HOUND). Does that chime with you? Widefox; talk 12:59, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
That argument is logically flawed - it's contradictory/mutually exclusive: it can't be both a) a trivial editor preference AND b) sloppy. It can't be both a} irrelevant AND b) important (enough to fix). Pick one. If a) then why do it, if b) where's the consensus? There's consensus for the opposite of your style changes. Crucially, it's the gratuitous and/or bogus nit-picking that's disruptive to collaboration. If you feel you must compulsively make these changes to a large watchlist, after being told not to by several editors, yes, it's LISTEN / WP:IDHT. You're an experienced editor, you know how it works here. Widefox; talk 11:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix on the semi-colon. Missed that! 206.82.167.3 ( talk) 20:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
By the way, I'd appreciate if you would try not to pick on me on every possible occasion; what I did here was pretty much fine and according to the WP:BRD guideline.
Your first instinct, every single time someone disagrees with you, is to revert to your preferred version. Every single time, whether you made a change initially or not. In cases like this guideline, this gives you precisely the first-mover advantage that BRD is designed to avoid. Combined with your utter intransigence regarding the most petty nonsense (like this explicit linking that that Widefox is discussing in vain with you once again above) this means that pretty much any article you're watching becomes de facto under your stewardship and thus that editing it takes an order of magnitude longer. What I really wish is that, as with 99.9% of other editors on the site, the very first thing that I did not see every single time you were involved in a discussion was a notification saying "Your edit on X was reverted by Dsimic". Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 08:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I found that my recent edit on Intel HD Graphics has been undone. I'd like to know which part do you consider redundant?
I added those info because the HD Graphics performance of the same silicon, say GT2, differs with and are constrained by different SKU TDPs. And Intel obviously gave branding numbers proportional to performance. Adding TDP info helps explain why the same silicon differs in branding.
For the lack of refs, maybe we can add a link to Intel's spec, though the relation to branding numbers may be not that obvious at first sight. Jsli ( talk) 04:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
This is Materialtechnology can you unprotected the O+ USA? Please!!! Materialtechnology ( talk) 01:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Could you clarify this edit of yours? It appears you restored without explanation material that Hullaballoo Wolfowitz claims is copyvio. I agree (based on google-search for some phrases) that there appears to be extensive copyvio, which seems to be par-for-the-course for the editors who contributed that content. DMacks ( talk) 05:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Row hammer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt ( talk) 06:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
You know, I though all web requests have a "/" prefix. Like in "/?title=User_talk:Dsimic&action=edit§ion=new" or "/wiki/Special:Watchlist". As long as we are taking about requests, IMHO, it is a prefix. But when we are talking about the whole URL, it becomes an infix or, if alone, a suffix. Fleet Command ( talk) 03:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Third one down in "Notes and exceptions". And "dates back" to a date in the past is a extra inessential superfluous unrequired unneeded surplus tautalogical redundancy. ;P Belle ( talk) 12:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
About this one and others. You reverted sometime ago also (Stagefright?). I was going to ask you. I generally put commas after years and the Android article does too. Then I see also like "A 2015 report, states..", an exception where the comma is postponed. Maybe in my case I was wrong. This isn't a major deal, just not good that I keep putting them in (out of (misplaced?) habit, and you having to take out..).
I'm not natively English speaking (and your name doesn't sound like either, but it seems your English is excellent/better than mine) but I'm not sure that is the issue. I noticed e.g. SciAm doesn't use commas ("In 2015 something.."), can't remember a counter-example except here at the moment. This is a "style guide issue", and maybe more appropriate for encyclopedias.. I looked up another random article and it does use commas after years but not consistently..
While I'm here, could you look over Julia (programming language). I didn't put in the banners.. maybe they are fair (or not)? Even, besides that, do you know of any specific WP rules for computer [programming languages]? comp.arch ( talk) 18:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
On 12 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Row hammer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the row hammer effect has been used in some privilege escalation computer security exploits? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Row hammer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 03:03, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I added some information to Talk:Computer program#Microcode Programs Should Be Removed in answer to your question about millicode, but that section could be a bit tl;dr, so here's what I posted there:
There's probably other stuff out there, including IBM papers in the Journal of Research and Development, if you're willing to spend USD 31 per paper. (IBM used to provide access to IBM JR&D papers for free from their site, but they've outsourced that to the IEEE now, and just about everything the IEEE has is behind a paywall, although they do at least make the 802 standards available for free.)
And, yes, it's architecturally the same sort of thing as PALcode - machine code executed in a special mode, with instructions implemented using {PAL,milli}code not being executable in that mode, and with access to special processor-dependent instructions and registers available - although, as Rwessel noted, DEC had a specific set of instructions architected as "traps to PALcode" in Alpha, while "this is done in millicode" is an implementation detail. DEC also did page table walks in PALcode rather than hardware; there's probably no reason IBM couldn't do that in some particular S/390 and z/Architecture implementations, but I don't know whether they did or not.
The millicode for POWER/PowerPC/Power ISA is just low-level ISA-dependent and possibly processor-dependent subroutines provided by the OS in a way that lets you quickly call them and get the version appropriate for the machine on which you're running. OS X, at least on PowerPC, had the "commpage", which was a region of the virtual address space shared between the kernel and userland, at a fixed virtual address, containing some routines where the implementation was processor-dependent for performance reasons; I think the routines were at fixed virtual addresses, so the code didn't have to know where they were. I seem to remember that a notion like this went back at least to Multics, with the pl1_operators segment containing routines to implement some operations in code generated by the PL/I compiler. Guy Harris ( talk) 22:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I had thought to add Atmel Software Framework to the ASF disambiguation page: I previously tried to look up the acronym and found nothing that fit. This meaning is covered in the first paragraph of Atmel application note AT08569. [1] I frequently use Wikipedia to decipher odd acronyms, and I thought others might benefit from this addition. My first try included a reference to the app note but I got an automated 'we don't do that here'. This is my very first attempted contribution, obviously I don't have a clue. Isn't it worth having another expansion of an acronym even if it's redlinked? 172.88.224.142 ( talk) 15:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
References
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Seeing your edits pop up in my watchlist regularly gives me a warm fuzzy feeling that Wikipedia keeps getting better. Thanks! -- intgr [talk] 08:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC) |
Hello Dsimic:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
Halloween!
–
Codename Lisa (
talk) 23:09, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Dragan -- Glenn here, and I've got a beaut of a situation!
As we well know, Wikipedia maintains a set of "catchphrases" -- e.g., "sock puppet", "drive-by edit", etc. -- which are invaluable in identifying and characterizing otherwise shadowy behaviors which may be of particular harm -- or, in some cases, of particular benefit -- to Wikipedia. With this context, my question to you is as follows: is there a catchphrase which refers to the practice of re-emphasizing or re-iterating or re-cycling negative aspects of a subject which have since been discredited, corrected, and/or ameliorated by the passage of time -- and this with the effect of keeping said subject under a perpetual but undeserved cloud?
My reason for asking this question is that I would like to have a rationale for doing some corrective editing to the article on scholarly publisher MDPI, wherein there seems to me to be too great an emphasis on the fact that MDPI was at one time included on a list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers" maintained by a single individual -- the famous "Beall's list" -- even though its justification for being on the list has been disputed, and even though it has since been intentionally removed from said list.
Full disclosure: I have a stake in this matter, inasumuch as an MDPI journal has just published one of my scholarly papers; but by the same token, I have some actual experience with MDPI as the basis for my input -- and that experience has been ultimately positive in the sense of confirming MDPI's scholarly integrity.
But not only that, Dragan, in respect to my credentials as an editor of the MDPI article -- I have been in the very den of the lion! In short, I have just concluded a brief but telling correspondence with Jeffrey Beall himself -- who, to his great credit, makes his email address readily available, and who responds quickly; and I cite here, by way of documenting some of the points previously alluded to, my inititiating missive:
I do not feel it appropriate to reproduce Professor Beall's brief but gracious reply; but its import was to confirm, without futher detail, that MDPI was indeed taken off of his list as of 27 October 2015; and this further implies to me that MDPI's former presence on this list should become a footnote, as opposed to a major topic, within the Wikipedia article.
So, Dragan, I need that magic Wikipedia catchphrase; and if it does already exist, you -- with your wonderful acquired knowledge of English -- could come up with one! Synchronist ( talk) 05:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
{{
Disputed}}
and {{
Inadequate lead}}
, placed in combination with starting a discussion on the article's talk page. However, IMHO doing the following steps, if that would be possible at the moment, should be better instead of simply tagging the article:
Hi Dsimic
Saw you contributing heavily to RAID topic. Just sat through another presentation where vendor claimed "RAID is dead" due to long rebuilds and need for higher fault resilience levels. I disagree...IMO RAID is a broad technical strategy that does not mandate XOR math, does not limit to 2 or 3 'parity' fragments, does not mandate rigid mapping of a Volume to specific disks, does not mandate 1:1 recovery of failed disks.
My question to you: Do you agree? Should the RAID topic be brought forward with coverage of modern fault-resilience techniques?
A given vendor might choose not to use the term 'RAID' in the context of their object store, but that's a Marketing decision. I think the classic definition of RAID still applies.
Davis471 ( talk) 15:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC) Mike Davis akropilot@gmail.com
Hi Dsimic,
Please see the p25 of Haswell hotchips presentation, titled Haswell Execution Unit Overview. It said there is a "New Branch Unit" sharing with 4th ALU under port6. I think this new branch unit is a branch execution unit, not a branch prediction unit.
Henry Huang — Preceding unsigned comment added by HuangHe THATIC ( talk • contribs) 09:26, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Dear Dsimic,
Indeed, disk cache has two meanings. The first is disk buffer – obviously not what page cache wants to refer to, and the second one is a circular reference back to page cache itself.
Generally speaking, a wikilink should not be to a disambiguation page, unless it is the ambiguity you want to point out.
So, please, revert your reversion on page cache: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Page_cache&type=revision&diff=695806260&oldid=695803912
TIA, RickJP ( talk) 08:46, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 17:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Judging by GitHub, Nim counts. How are you judging? Judging by mature languages and current usage, it can be argued that Ada and ML are niche, nonspecific, and are actually language families (though C++ is likewise a family of non-free specs and free implementations of compilers, interpreters, etc.). Mister Mormon ( talk) 21:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Wishing you a merry Christmas and a happy new year... |
Hello, Mr. Simic. I thought I'd drop you a note explaining my edit at
GOP (disambiguation). Per
WP:DABPRIMARY, When a page has "(disambiguation)" in its title – i.e., it is the disambiguation page for a term for which a primary topic has been identified...(that topic) should not be mixed in with the other links
. Since
GOP redirects to
Republican Party (United States), it has been identified as the primary topic and should be at the top of
GOP (disambiguation). However, since you disagree with that assessment, I'd like to nudge you to make a
WP:Requested move of
GOP (disambiguation) →
GOP, and, if moved, the current (reverted) version of that page would be correct. Let me know if I can be of any assistance with the
WP:RM! Thanks, --
Tavix (
talk) 07:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
It's ok to list articles in the "See also" section that are linked in the body if their of core relevance to the article in question. You can see this in many existing articles. That said, I added CryptGenRandom to entropy-supplying system calls before I mentioned it in the article body; I'm fine with the removal. Risc64 ( talk) 18:01, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Say, you have a passion for date formats. Care to weigh in at Talk:2011–12 Saudi Arabian protests#Move page to avoid date ambiguity? That article is currently linked from the Main Page. Thanks! – void xor 20:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
I noticed your recent reverts to edits I made on the 3 NAT articles. I'm not so sure if the links are irrelevant / advertising -- they're opensource and non-commercial implementations of the protocols that each article describes.
When you have a moment, maybe take a closer look at the links. If you still think they're irrelevant / advertising, then I would suggest maybe getting rid of the Support section in NAT Port Mapping Protocol as well. If it's irrelevant to provide a list of opensource implementations of the protocol the article is about, then it's probably even more irrelevant to provide a list of end-user software and hardware (mostly commercial / proprietary) that uses said protocols in nothing more than an ancillary way.
216.19.189.212 ( talk) 02:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I am using your php program that fetches page views statistics for a while as a hobby, and I want to thank you for that. I know that the data that your php program comes from stats.grok.se. There comes now a "better" page view stats provider, which can be visited at tools.wmflabs.org/musikanimal/pageviews. This alternative website looks better, some of the reasons are (1) page view data of more than one article can be viewed simultaneously (2) it can release page view data from both desktop and mobile web. Actually, in the English Wikipedia, on the external tools of the view history tab, the page view statistics link now directs to tools.wmflabs.org/musikanimal/pageviews. The daily page view values of stats.grok.se and tools.wmflabs.org/musikanimal (desktop platform views only) differ slightly. I suggest to create a php program for this alternative page view stat provider if you are interested. They also release CSV and JSON files. CunningRabbitXenon07 ( talk) 08:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, smart guy
Okay, I think I have found a little less selfish way. Setting the alignment parameter to "right" on {{ Wide image}} creates the layout you want while avoiding the problem that I have. Sure WP:IMAGESIZE says "respect user preferences" but I guess a win-win compromise is always better.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 15:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Talk:Server Application Programming Interface, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:Server Application Programming Interface. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Ttt74 ( talk) 17:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello
I have set up User:Codename Lisa/Websites and their publishers in an attempt to improve the existing citations quality in the computing topics. Perhaps it can be a part of the Manual of Style one day. I hope you find it useful. And if you wanted to edit or contribute, I'd be honored.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 02:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
|website=
parameter instead of |work=
, in the current information layout? Using |website=
seems slightly more logical to me, while these two parameters (AFAIK) should be equivalent from the {{
Cite web}}'s current perspective. Another thing I'd like to discuss (which hinges on the first one) is whether we should somehow keep the website domain as part of the citation? IMHO, keeping the domain should be highly usable simply because many people remember the websites by their domains; as a result, leaving the domain out might be actually confusing. I'm not sure whether having both |website=
and |work=
parameters might be a solution, so the value of |website=
is the website domain, and the value of |work=
is the descriptive name of the website? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 09:54, 27 March 2016 (UTC)|work=
is an alias for |website=
. So I use |work=
to type three letters less. But the point is, when you populate both with different values, the template ignores one and throws a CS1 exception error. (CS1 stands for
Citation Style 1.)An article that you have been involved in editing— NX Bit —has been proposed for merging with Executable space protection. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. WikiWisePowder ( talk) 21:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I was looking through IEEE papers from a 2009 conference that I attended in Dearborn, Michigan, and happened to see one authored by Dragan Simic entitled "Simulation, Design, and Evaluation of an entire Hybrid Electric All-Terrain Vehicle". Is that you, or an impostor? – void xor 02:31, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I came across the reference to storage devices as I was looking for additional sources. I wouldn't have thought of them either, but that's what the source said and it seems to make sense. Peter Flass ( talk) 17:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
This discussion should probably have gone to the talkpage for Peripheral - my fault, sorry. Peter Flass ( talk) 12:04, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
{{
Moved discussion to}}
. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 21:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)I unified the references. I think this is better readable. If you like it the other way, please unify ALL references the same way. -- 88.71.145.185 ( talk) 05:29, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Although a power supply with a larger than needed power rating will have an extra margin of safety against overloading, such a unit is often less efficient and wastes more electricity at lower loads than a more appropriately sized unit. For example, a 900-watt power supply with the [[80 Plus Silver]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 85-percent efficient for loads above 180 W) may only be 73% efficient when the load is lower than 100 W, which is a typical idle power for a desktop computer. Thus, for a 100 W load, losses for this supply would be 37 W; if the same power supply was put under a 450 W load, for which the supply's efficiency peaks at 89%, the loss would be only 56 W despite supplying 4.5 times the useful power.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/2624/3 | title = Debunking Power Supply Myths | date = 2008-09-22 | accessdate = 2014-10-07 | author = Christoph Katzer | publisher = [[AnandTech]] | page = 3}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.coolermaster.com/xresserver01-DLFILE-P130218025925ba-F13032500212140.html | title = Cooler Master UCP Product Sheet | year = 2008 | accessdate = 2014-10-11 | publisher = [[Cooler Master]] | format = PDF}}</ref> For a comparison, a 500-watt power supply carrying the [[80 Plus Bronze]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 82-percent efficient for loads above 100 W) may provide an 84-percent efficiency for a 100 W load, wasting only 19 W.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/4908/silverstone-strider-plus-500w-modular-power/4 | title = SilverStone Strider Plus{{snd}} 500 W Modular Power | date = 2011-10-10 | accessdate = 2014-10-11 | author = Martin Kaffei | publisher = [[AnandTech]] | page = 4}}</ref>
Although a power supply with a larger than needed power rating will have an extra margin of safety against overloading, such a unit is often less efficient and wastes more electricity at lower loads than a more appropriately sized unit. For example, a 900-watt power supply with the [[80 Plus Silver]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 85-percent efficient for loads above 180 W) may only be 73% efficient when the load is lower than 100 W, which is a typical idle power for a desktop computer. Thus, for a 100 W load, losses for this supply would be 37 W; if the same power supply was put under a 450 W load, for which the supply's efficiency peaks at 89%, the loss would be only 56 W despite supplying 4.5 times the useful power.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/2624/3
| title = Debunking Power Supply Myths
| date = 2008-09-22 | accessdate = 2014-10-07
| author = Christoph Katzer | publisher = [[AnandTech]]
| page = 3
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.coolermaster.com/xresserver01-DLFILE-P130218025925ba-F13032500212140.html
| title = Cooler Master UCP Product Sheet
| year = 2008 | accessdate = 2014-10-11
| publisher = [[Cooler Master]] | format = PDF
}}</ref> For a comparison, a 500-watt power supply carrying the [[80 Plus Bronze]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 82-percent efficient for loads above 100 W) may provide an 84-percent efficiency for a 100 W load, wasting only 19 W.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/4908/silverstone-strider-plus-500w-modular-power/4
| title = SilverStone Strider Plus{{snd}} 500 W Modular Power
| date = 2011-10-10 | accessdate = 2014-10-11
| author = Martin Kaffei | publisher = [[AnandTech]]
| page = 4
}}</ref>
I have noticed that you have removed my content GNU/Linux from the Linux distribution page. Can you tell me why? Why it can't be called as GNU/Linux? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balajisource ( talk • contribs) 17:27, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
r.e. CPU cache hmm. what I was trying to do is get 'definitive links' that define terms precisely, i.e. increasing the fidelity of link information all round (increasing wikipedias value for AI e.g. thought-vectors... it's all about labelled data, and we have a great open resource here.)
An alternative is to create a 'glossary page' for 'microarchitecture' ? I've tried doing this here, creating a Glossary of computer graphics; but the problem is I found myself replicating lots of information, and the link structure gets *more complex*, with extra indirects. So I switched to trying this.. modifying existing articles to contain more specific link targets. the 'defn/term' templates seem handy where a section per term might be overkill.
Whats the best compromise here? I would ideally at least like the redirects to hit the specify term, rather than just the heading.
>> r.e. "That "CACHE-LINES" is an explicit anchor, which is useful as explicit anchors allow redirects to continue working if sections are renamed at some point in time "
This is the point of making definitive definitions of terms - they *dont* get renamed. (you just redirect synonyms to them). Fewer symbols/names to keep track of
>> " is a great destination for non-native English speakers looking to improve their written English"
.. my thinking is increasing link 'accuracy' increases the chances of automatic translation tools improving (it's 'labelled data',& adding more 'machine-processable' structure). A redirect into the body of text itself would be a hint that the meaning of the sentence is a definition of that specific term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmadd ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I entirely agree with you. I used the visual editor instead of modifying the wiki code directly. I simply added the mention about Haskell. Yet when I saved, the visual editor somehow decided to reorganize the wiki code for the whole infobox. -- Anareth ( talk) 07:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic, I have a question regarding your recent edit, https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Linux_kernel&oldid=725063821. If I'm understanding MOS:PMC correctly, than it seems that the typo should just be fixed, as it doesn't seem textually important (mentioned in the WL), so I'm curious why you used [sic] instead. -- Michael Reed ( talk) 16:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I have a proposal at Template talk:Comparison of memory cards#Proposal to transpose that could certainly use another opinion, if you care to weigh in. Thanks! – void xor 19:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I've added a section (ddAuto) which is very related to dd utility but you removed it in (Revision as of 09:54, 29 April 2016) with a justification of what seems to be promotional content. What is your suggestion to improve the section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.149.91.152 ( talk)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on HardenedBSD requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Pyrusca ( talk) 23:10, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dragan,
your tool is not working anymore since stats.grok.se is gone. I think we must port it to the pageviews API.-- Kopiersperre ( talk) 13:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Dsimic. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 00:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Dear Dragan, Two things: first, I've gotten involved with a huge new initiative ( http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/6/2/5 ) regarding which I've attempted to contact you directly; and second -- and without spending very much time at all on this, and only if you have some familiarity with Wikipedia image formattin g -- could you give me a pointer or two about how to get rid of some of the white space around the image I've added to the blast (protocol) page -- but without reducing image size? Synchronist ( talk) 17:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi.
There is an AfD entry on a software product that I opened a long time ago, but it has received zero responses so far (apparently due to a glitch). I was wondering if you'd be interested in taking a look at it. This discussion is at:
Thanks
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 12:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Should MoS shortcut redirects be sorted to certain specific maintenance categories? An Rfc has been opened on this talk page to answer that question. Your sentiments would be appreciated! Paine Ellsworth put'r there 17:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 17:42, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
I introduced a proposal at Talk:New Zealand DX class locomotive#Class register notability, and believe it could benefit from your two cents. As always, I value your independent opinion. Since this is a notability matter, I am specifically asking you because we should get opinions outside of WikiProject Trains for balance. Thanks for your help! – void xor 01:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
As you're one of the editors most active on the OpenZFS article, I especially wanted to ask your views at an RFC I just opened.
Thank you. FT2 ( Talk | email) 21:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
I am one of the contributors to the open source SSH server called Teleport. We have a fairly active and growing community and the question of starting a wikipedia page comes up a lot. I am also a fan of various OSS projects by CoreOS and noticed that you've been contributing to those pages (that you for that!), that's how I decided to reach out and ask for guidance. Do you think we can connect via Skype or Google Hangout? Thank you!
( Ekontsevoy ( talk) 16:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)).
Hi, I'm Enwebb. Dsimic, thanks for creating OVN!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for your contribution. Wikipedia depends on verifiability; please consider adding references to this page, as it currently has none.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Enwebb ( talk) 23:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you explain your change summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Default_route&diff=prev&oldid=718310978
This was one of my first larger contributions. I was a little disappointed to see it deleted. I was quite frustrated to see that the comment was nearly unintelligible. I still don't know what you mean by "feeling good". If you're going to erase someone's contribution please meet their effort halfway with a good explanation.
Cdosborn ( talk) 22:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect
ConsoleKit. Since you had some involvement with the ConsoleKit redirect, you might want to participate in
the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 21:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC).
21:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Reballing. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 10#Reballing until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. pandakekok9 ( talk) Junk the Philippine anti-terror law! 08:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I see you reverted the page I wrote for PMCI WG [1]. Can you tell why? This page was prepared by the WG itself to create a framework for all the standards developed by it (NC-SI, MCTP, PLDM, SPDM). Eliel Louzoun ( talk) 06:14, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Template:Linux layers/Test 1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 ( talk) 05:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
The redirect is being discussed for deletion. Your opinions are welcomed. Greatder ( talk) 02:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
The redirect Hardened BSD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 29 § Hardened BSD until a consensus is reached. Greatder ( talk) 11:20, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
This user may have left Wikipedia. Dsimic has not edited Wikipedia since July 2016. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
↓ | Skip to bottom of the page | ↓ |
Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. |
This is Dsimic's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
Article policies
|
Archives: 1, 2 |
In a few words, I prefer to keep
discussions unfragmented. Thus, if you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. Similarly, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. As a reminder, we can use our watchlists to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, please feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere, or simply use the built-in notifications by mentioning my username while posting comments in other places. |
This is a Wikipedia
user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dsimic. |
Manual of Style (MoS) |
---|
Don't you hate it when that happens? ;) -- 168.215.131.150 ( talk) 21:21, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:SATA Express host plug.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
I have removed them from the article due to non-compliance with WP:NFC. Do not re-add them. Our policies on non-free media is very restrictive, and those are replaceable, and thus not acceptable. Werieth ( talk) 20:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Dude whats your problem with my aricle that was revelant information. You yourself make blog if you want to. Oranjelo100 ( talk) 10:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Texting: The choice of a new, illiterate, generation... Thanks for the laugh, Dsimic! Props to you for trying. PaulMEdwards ( talk) 10:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
Thanks for the explanation after you reverted some of our edits back to their original form. All makes sense.
However, with that said, we would like to request a few edits to the Serial ATA Express (SATA Express) wiki page: /info/en/?search=Serial_ATA_Express
Let me know if you have any questions or concerns to the requests above.
Many thanks,
Jbalich ( talk) 19:30, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I'd like to break out U.2 as a separate page for the connector formerly known as SFF-8639 [1]. There is a draft available now ( /info/en/?search=Draft:U.2_(SFF-8639))
Thanks! Jmhands ( talk) June 9, 2015 (UTC)
192.55.54.0/24 == Jmhands
holds true as those IP addresses belong to an address block
assigned to Intel? :) —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 14:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)References
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |website=
(
help)
Can we change the title of the "Next Generation Form Factor" wiki page to "M.2"? NGFF is its former name and I feel that the page should reflect that change as it is listed on many other pages by its proper name "M.2". Thanks! Jbalich ( talk) 18:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
We don't need to revert other people's edits in order to modify additions for flow, structure or readability. A simple cut/paste/edit would suffice and also permit others to see what was done. Nobody owns a wikipedia page. Blouis79 ( talk) 21:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Just a note, I went ahead and merged the two move requests on Talk:Linux Gaming. Having two separate move requests happening at once on the same talk page can be a bit confusing to readers, and it makes it so that consensus has to be form only once. Steel1943 ( talk) 04:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm more than happy to discuss anything - however; just because something's 'accepted' does NOT mean or make or correct. Wikipædia IS an encyclopedic work. If we follow your logic, then it's almost certain the (so-called) 'bastions' of American journalism would sink - dramatically in quality. However, they ALL have guides to proper language use. All of them. Regardless if their writers' personal idiosyncrasies, they write in a UNIFORM style.
Additionally, I was speaking to the head editor of PCWorld the other day (sheer coincidence) and HE brought up his displeasure with it's use by 'readers.' Another point; on ourpise, I forgot the gentleman's name, but, he 'writes' for an inline 'journal,' & he used INCORRECT grammar. When I pontes it out, he responded: 'rules are meant to b broken.' He must think he's Shakespeare - he's not.
Just 'because' is NOT an answer. We ALL need to uphold things. No - it's not 'the end if the world,' but it's WRONG to encourage continued MISuse. Finally. As I'm NOT changing the arrocle's structure, I fail to see HOW it has to be removed - by ... you. Of ALL people, it's people LIKE you who should ENCOURAGE PROPER use of words & speech. Why not just LEAVE it - if - IF - theirs an 'outcry,' THEN 'correct' it (lol).
But, in fact, all I did was WRITE it CORECTLY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UNOwenNYC ( talk • contribs) 23:46, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, following a review of your contributions, I have enabled reviewer rights on your account. This gives you the ability to:
Please remember that this user right:
Thank you very much! I'll make sure to use this privilege only with the best intentions, and according to the Wikipedia rules. -- Dsimic ( talk) 13:45, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
The Android 4.4 "launcher" is exclusive to the Nexus 5, and is technically part of the Google Search app, it is not a stock component of Android, and requires the non-free Google apps in order to function (thus, I cannot consider it to be a stock screenshot of Android). All other builds of 4.4 (even from Google itself, ironically) use the stock launcher from 4.3. ViperSnake151 Talk 17:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:RouterBoard R52n-M.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster ( talk) 20:50, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
It's none of your business how many edits I made.-- Oranjelo100 ( talk) 14:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
you will make me feel better when you will stop stalking and harrasing me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oranjelo100 ( talk • contribs)
About your Third Opinion request: I am a regular volunteer at the Third Opinion project. Your request for an opinion has been removed because this is primarily a conduct dispute. 3O does not handle disputes which are primarily conduct disputes, which are handled through RFC/U, ANI, or ARBCOM. Regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC) PS: @ Oranjelo100: While I express no opinion about any of the rest, you do need to sign your posts with four tildes. Failing to sign them makes following a conversation very difficult. Regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 22:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | Talk 04:38, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much! I'll make sure to use this privilege only with the best intentions, and according to the Wikipedia rules. — Dsimic ( talk) 14:18, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
The idea was to link to the page and section: /info/en/?search=Multigate_device#FinFET
So a user who clicks the "FinFET" link will be directed to a section specifically about FinFETs, rather than a more general article about various multigate devices. Is that not the correct thing to do? Or is there another issue I'm not seeing?
InternetMeme ( talk) 15:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for: Under Microsoft windows Do not used "Windows" Xp" / "Windows 7" Used Lana and Areo okay?
The Original Barnstar | |
Under Microsoft windows Do not used "Windows" Xp" / "Windows 7" Used Lana and Areo okay?
Mathsquare ( talk) 03:43, 30 November 2013 (UTC) |
Dear Dsimic, please see the "talk" section of the BLAST (protocol) article for my response to your much appreciated attention to said article. Synchronist ( talk) 01:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
I saw that you reverted my update. Thanks for catching the layout issue. It didn't seem to show up for me under preview or even after I saved the changes until I collapsed and then expanded the Android 4.4 subsection. It should be good now. I have also added some sources. -- Jimv1983 ( talk) 02:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Take a look at this. Cheers. -- uKER ( talk) 14:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for this; I hadn't noticed so thanks for updating it. In addition, while I'm sure it was implied via my use of the "thanks" feature, thanks for all your work on the Nexus 5 article. :) Best. Acalamari 23:52, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Dsimic, it does look better! Synchronist ( talk) 02:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Laravel (Framework) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://teamtreehouse.com/forum/php-frameworks-2. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - Mr X 20:35, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
History nicely fixed :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Laravel_%28framework%29&action=history Ronhjones (Talk) 20:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Didn't seem notable to me. Someone should look the promo contribs of Special:Contributions/Wikidevb (and other SPAs which wrote that FlexRAID piece) in other articles. Someone not using his real name ( talk) 18:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
@ Dsimic: That section isn't about FlexRAID. An article on FlexRAID is being prepared separately. The section was about RAID over File System as a general RAID approach. Refer to prior discussion on the entry here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spectwiki ( talk • contribs) 17:41, July 30, 2014 (UTC)
Dsimic hi, I don't normally edit articles so perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick. The material in the Nexus 4 page was waffle at the very best and that is what I removed. Is it that I have not correctly followed a procedure (there seem to be a lot) or just that you don't agree, and as a prominent editor/contributor you therefor felt justified in removing my edit with no reasoning? Just so I know what I should do in future. I contribute financially to Wikipedia and hate to see it dumbed-down with junk text. Nick (ozy1ozy) Ozy1ozy ( talk) 21:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I'm very interested in your decision to pull the list of notable people in the cloud computing industry that drive the globally significant OpenStack project? Wikipedia has no problems with low rate movies having lists of actors and such, so why should the cloud computing industry and it's currently most significant project OpenStack not be able to list the leaders of the project? it's a larger than usual "key people" list, but that's the way the governance model is structured, so it's justified to declare that. I will be putting more information up about the unique and innovative OpenStack governance model in the coming days.
Thanks DHOTOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drhopontopofus ( talk • contribs) 11:51, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dsimic, I've really enjoyed collaborating with you on Replicant (operating system). I think we have made some significant improvements. If you ever need help on a project in the future, I'll be glad to assist. -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 00:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I believe you are in violation of Wiki consensus in your constant reversion without explanation. I carefully explained my reasons in the Talk section for reverting your original edit. You ignored the talk and went ahead and reverted or reinserted without responding, twice. Please see Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. While this is not a policy, your continued reversion without discussion is close to an edit war. Tom94022 ( talk) 00:46, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
I've read your discussion and I understand your reason, on one hand you're right when you say that wikipedia is not a source code repository on the other when I googled Damerau–Levenshtein distance, I was interested into knowing what that was, its applications an so on but, on the other hand, I also needed to implement it in one of my programs, so it would have been very useful to have a runnable (and possibly well written) source code on hand rather than googling again and reinventing the wheel taking pieces of sources here and there (I built the algoritmh i published from various questions on Stack Overflow). So this is my proposal: I publish the source on one website like rosettacode.org or github and then I publish the link into the "External Link", section. I've just noticed that there is already a link to a C implementation on github that I skipped yesterday, but I've looked at it now and it seems way too complicated yto be useful (for example I don't understand why a function returning a distance between 2 char vectors never uses the char or char* datatype, I'm sure that a deeper reading will unveil all the mechanism that probably threats char vector as vector of unsigned integers and that in the end it will definitely work, but my implementation, taking simply the two char vector as an input seems to me much easier and clear) Alinoli ( talk) 12:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
char
, they do use unsigned int
instead (possibly for an extended alphabet), there's even a comment on top of the source file stating that: Note we use character ints, not chars. At the same, that implementation looks a bit inefficient, as they use a linked list for deduping and storing stuff, what involves linear searches every time. —
Dsimic (
talk) 16:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)Hi, I thought from the /info/en/?search=Talk:Android_version_history#AOSP_vs_Android talk that one should not make any distictions between Android/AOSP, thus not distinguish between open and closed sourced software. Threrefore, Android as the end used know it is what is provided by Google, thus making screenshots of the GEL appropriate to represent the Android home screen. Looking at Android.com, images of the GEL is displayed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandabear123 ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic: I've been down with a bad cold since Jan 2 so haven't responded, but will in the next day or so. Thanks for being patient. You can delete this after u read it. Tom94022 ( talk) 21:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Android can technically be built upon any Linux kernel and was never limited to 3.4.10. In fact that version with the citation in the article is wrong. It's the kernel version for the HTC One ONLY. The Nexus 5 for instance uses 3.4.0. The Snap 800 note 3 also uses 3.4.0 with a slightly different revision. Older kernel versions are also used on KitKat, the second Nexus 7 has 3.1.10.
Some devices are able to use kernel 3.12 with proper sources. Even my i9001 runs 3.4.77. There is simply no standard/generic kernel version for Android, it all depends on the SoC, device and sources.
Sources:
Yowanvista ( talk) 11:45, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
What does the non-breaking space do? -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 02:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Ooops sorry I don't know what happened, your link work, but when I did the change my browser (firefox) was jumping to the bottom of the page. -- Dadu ( talk) 09:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Nikon sue only for the style, but IMO Nikon worry about Android OS, Nikon worry if something happen as mobile phone and mainly smartphone made compact camera sold only 40 percent than 2 years before, while 2013 DSLR sold is also declining. Thank you. Gsarwa ( talk) 04:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
If you are looking for a new article to edit, I just created Ark OS. It's pretty minimal right now, and could seriously benefit from that magic Dsimic touch. -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 00:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I've noticed you're setting up column formatting for References and See also in numerous articles. This is all well and good. Would you mind marking these edits as minor to keep our watchlists reasonable? Thanks. ~ KvnG 14:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Re: your edit, what was shown instead of the matrix? I have MathJax turned on because it's more reliable and produces better-looking output, so I hadn't seen the problem. Sometimes, saving without changes can force the LaTeX output to be regenerated. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 20:50, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
It's not a matter of better language but of verifiability. "A frame begins with preamble and start frame delimiter, ..." implies that preamble and SFD are part of the frame which they are not.
Your source, clause 35.2.3.2 "The preamble <preamble> begins a frame transmission. [...] The SFD (Start Frame Delimiter) <sfd> indicates the start of a frame ..." is ambiguous – it doesn't really tell where these sequences belong to. Please take a look at the more basic clauses 3.1.1 and 3.2 which very clearly show and state that preamble and SFD are not part of the frame but the (largely neglected) packet: "A MAC frame starts immediately after the SFD." (3.2.2).
With respect to your preferences I'll change the phrase to "a frame begins after the preamble and SFD". Zac67 ( talk) 18:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you. I've spent over an hour trying to find the origin of {{ Timeline Debian GNU/Linux}} as used in the main Debian Wikipedia article. It's out of date (and I think about to become more so), but I can't find the "source" with which to fix it. I see you take an interest in that Debian article, and are probably more skilled than I am on Wiki-matters, so I hope you can point me to the relevant editing page. Larry Doolittle ( talk) 20:35, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
{{t|Template_name}}
tag comes handy. Also, you can manually create and open a direct URL in form of
/info/en/?search=Template:template_name.It doesn't look like ThinkPad Tablet 2 is Android? Frietjes ( talk) 23:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Regarding your "
cleanup" of my edit on
Intel HD Graphics, I was following the format mentioned to me by
Paine Ellsworth (
talk ·
contribs), who told me that {{
redr}}
should be used even if only one category is desired and that a line break should be put between the template and the redirect itself. Is there evidence that this is no longer the consensus? (I see now that
WP:REDCAT mentions the line break but not {{redr}}; I'm not sure how regularly that guideline is being updated though.) --
SoledadKabocha (
talk) 05:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
{{R ...}}
categorization syntax; basically, {{
redr}} template is (still) just a proposal for a redirects unification and not officially suggested to be used, as visible from its documentation and
WP:REDCAT. If {{
redr}} template had become the offical way for tagging redirects, there would be bots automatically editing redirect pages thus making it used all around.{{R ...}}
tag – I've seen hundreds of such redirects (and zero redirects using {{
redr}} template, by the way). I'm not saying that merging it into the same line is by the book, but it makes such "one-R" redirects a bit more readable, I'd guess, so editors tend not to put single "R-tags" into separate lines. IIRC, I've even seen a few bots placing these tags into the same line, while fixing double redirects etc. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 06:08, 17 February 2014 (UTC){{R ...}}
tags – though, that's only my opinion. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 00:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC){{R ...}}
tags, I'd say that adding a 1em
top padding to the message box would make a world of difference, as right now it sits too close to the redirect description. It's somewhat "blingy" when compared to the R-tag's output, but it's quite nice once that old imprint is gone – but still, that padding would put a cherry on top. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 03:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Is there any conclusion I should draw from this discussion yet? (Paine Ellsworth, sorry for relying on WP:Notifications rather than notifying you manually.)
Is it worth formally proposing that {{
redr}}
is to be used
iff multiple categories are desired? What syntax will be used for "{{
R from alternative language}}'s parameters in Redr"? --
SoledadKabocha (
talk) 18:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
<div>
element with the required CSS definition, as those might play better with the rest of the page elements, when compared to placing a more simple <br />
. Also, including a simple <br />
actually creates a surrounding <p>
element containing that <br />
in the rendered HTML code, what results in a vertical spacing much larger than the desired 1em
spacing. Of course, no modifications should go to the already existing templates, everything goes into the {{
Redr}}'s composition of them.Undo you here. I just thought I accidentally inserted two blank lines. Beware that there has been some unholy MOS war about this issue, i.e. how many lines are allowed in the footer. (General pointer [1]) Someone not using his real name ( talk) 20:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Please do not remove red links, as you did at Metadata - they're a deliberate feature of Wikipedia; see WP:REDLINK. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
On reflection I think this comment was unnecessarily harsh and I'm sorry for it. – Steel 22:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For your distinction between Android RAM requirements and recommendations. read ( talk) 23:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC) |
I removed categories because the article already was part of subcategories of them, for example, all Capacitive touchscreen mobile phones are automatically "also" Touchscreen mobile phones, and as a consequence automatically "also" Mobile phones. At least at Commons, where I'm more familiar with categorising, this would be a clear case of overcategorisation. | FDMS 17:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm curious what you think. If you want to revert it all, or make massive edits, that's okay. I just figured it wasn't so dubious I had to do it in a talk page; I figured I'd WP:BB and do the edit process live. 71.41.210.146 ( talk) 23:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, cool guy
I could come up with several reasons to perform this deletion but I chose one that covers them all. In case I wasn't clear enough, here is my concerns: You see, the text is unreferenced, has no context and is very technical, so much so that only interests a minority. So, I supplied manual as the reason because manual is the place where you read unreferenced technical stuff like this. (If you'd have to add a source for them, your source would be most likely a manual.)
When I removed them, I thought chances are that they are listed in one of the sources in close proximity, so no one misses anything. But if nothing else, let's at least solve the invalid HTML problem. It's ordered list item -> definition list -> definition item, which is not good. The same list can be written in prose form.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 01:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, I thought my edit summary was quite clear that I was about to do another undo (which I can't do now due to the edit conflict and overlapping edit region). Can you revert yourself so I may show you without me having to undo again? Widefox; talk 22:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. Someone not using his real name ( talk) 23:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC) |
Dear Dragan: I am injecting myself into the dialogue regarding artificial intelligence (see the newly created User:Synchronist), and I am counting on you to be my Virgil! User:Qwertyus also alerted! Synchronist ( talk) 05:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the thanks. I’m confused by your latest edits here. "Assembly object" is a fairly important concept. I’m not sure what your objection to it is, but I found the new edits harder to understand. I think we should put more work into this. Strebe ( talk) 08:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
As far as I'm noticed, the last part of the article was about whether that thing is android or not, but the last statement which i removed and you added back suggest there are android applications available......The system's android compatibility is announced officially and as far as I concerned, neither side of the argument used the ability to install many android apps as a main argument... C933103 ( talk) 20:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
The Technology Barnstar | ||
For your extensive contributions in the field of computing. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 13:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC) |
I'm glad I'm not the only one bothered by Lowercase sigmabot's failure to add a line break! Thanks for fixing it. Note that I complained about the issue earlier this month, but the issue stalled after the fix caused an error. If you would like, you are welcome to and reference my thread in the archives. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 05:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey, with this edit: Special:Permalink/596825429 you moved the article because of its punctuation. How do you know the correct punctuation? Help:Punctuation does not help me. User:ScotXW t@lk 15:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. :) Sloppy writing has no place in the compendium of the human knowledge, we should extinguish this uclear construct used by those too lazy to decide whether to use and or or. Sofia Koutsouveli ( talk) 23:07, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Please don't insert blank lines between indented talk page posts, as you have been doing at
User talk:Σ. This goes against both
WP:LISTGAP (Do not separate list items, including items in a
definition list (a list made with leading semicolons and colons)
) and
WP:INDENTGAP (Blank lines should not be used between indented lines as they are currently rendered as the end of a list and the start of a new one.
). Thank you. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 09:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Oranjelo100 is at it again. Now he's moved on to game emulation. I'm not asking you to do anything. I just thought I'd let you know, in case he's continued abusing your scope of involvement with Wikipedia, because I saw your history of trying so valiantly and thoroughly to deal with this person. You handled it perfectly, and incredibly thoroughly, and positively but realistically, and I completely agree with you. You were given ridiculous advice such as "perhaps you could have been slightly" blah blah. No, you pretty much couldn't. :( — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 10:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Dsimic. I noticed you reverted my change to the backporting page. I used to think that backporting meant applying bug fixes from new versions to old versions just like the article used to explain, but https://backports.wiki.kernel.org and the http://backports.debian.org/ do not fit that mold, hence my expansion. As it is, the article is back to not defining the term in a comprehensive enough manner. Do you have a better definition? If not, all unrevert and let somebody else improve it. ARosa ( talk) 04:23, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic, good to see you added the bitstream entry. I'd refrained (I guess we both came to BSD dab from Phoronix?!) as there wasn't a vendor neutral target, so I quickly created something and changed the target and entry. Widefox; talk 09:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
<!-- warning: something links here -->
comments. :) —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 03:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)Why did you remove Cache Intersystems from well known DBMS? This is the premier DBMS for healthcare systems and many financial institutions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.47.54 ( talk) 01:59, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
You recently changed existing <code> tags to <tt> on the Crypto API (Linux) article. Why? As far as I can tell, there is no visual difference between them. "Code" seems like a more descriptive version and I've seen people convert them the other way around. -- intgr [talk] 09:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Here's some text with inside the <code> tag,
FYI OpenSSH is a fork of OSSH, which is a fork of ssh by Tatu Ylönen. See Project History and Credits page of OpenSSH site. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk• track) 21:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey. Look at this: Microsoft Cortana Easter Eggs. Looks like someone makes an article every time Microsoft so much as sneezes or burps. 188.245.55.0 ( talk) 15:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox mobile phone#Unrestricted bootloader. You were selected because of recent edits to the article Android rooting. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:03, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Check the Graphics Lab. I've had a crack at the M.2 keying request. :) NikNaks talk - gallery 20:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Masssly. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Red Hat Linux because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. — Sadat (Masssly)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:KDE. Thanks. Codename Lisa ( talk) 10:40, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
|l1=
from people's talk pages; but you are open-minded and friendly. So, I abused your hospitality and did that edit.
I looked at the UEFI articles on 12 computers. Each one carried the n which was almost unreadable by people inquisitive of knowing what boot lingo mean. I thought I could help by making the n bold n.
Anyway, no issues. thanx for the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zambi007 ( talk • contribs) 05:09, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ScottXW and his "deletion heros". Thank you. Yunshui 雲 水 08:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Dsimic: this is a notice that after a MfD and two RfCs, the Editor Review process has been officially retired. You should not expect further comments on your open Editor Review, which will be archived soon. In the coming weeks there may be information available on alternative processes that you can pursue if you so desire. —/ Mendaliv/ 2¢/ Δ's/ 21:05, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Why does lowercase make more sense to you? If you are going to revert somebody's edit, you should provide a more elaborate reason than what arbitrarily makes more sense to you. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 05:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, Dsimic! Now that the move of "Android rooting" to "Rooting (Android OS)" has been completed, I know you'll be interested in this parallel proposal:
I'll see you there, I'm sure! =) — Jaydiem ( talk) 19:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know that I had missed items for my ZFS edit. I've updated it, and it should meet the requirements, year & references. Let me know if additional information is required. A'kwell ( talk) 20:30, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I do not understand how the article can be full of e.g. "flash-based" with a hyphen, and that is fine, but as soon as it becomes "flash memory-based" the hyphen is supposed to change to an en-dash.
Why??? What is the justification here? What is the benefit? I think it just clutters up the wikitext, makes editing more difficult, and will require more redirects when these things get into article titles (since nobody will be typing in the keycodes for endashes in the search box). Jeh ( talk) 06:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Please do not use that style of citation syntax on articles. The |publisher field is designed to list the publishing company of the work, not the domain name it came from. The title of the website must be in either a |work or |website field. Also please do not use Android Police as a source; it is a blog, and blogs are typically not considered reliable sources. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
|website=
parameter. However, to me web sites are publishers and specifying their domains instead is more usable in many cases, but of course that's debatable. For example, if a
LWN.net article is used as a reference, I'd say that 99% of people wouldn't recognize "Eklektix" when it's specified as a publisher, while "LWN.net" is pretty much widely recognizable. Should we end up using something like "|website=
LWN.net |publisher=Eklektix" for this example?Thank you for your recent improvements to kmscon article. Posting here only because I didn't want to spam your echo notification log with multiple "thanks" (for each edit). Good work! — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk• track) 08:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I was just commenting on a feature SSH has. Yes, it allows to "punch" through a firewall, but I don't how that affects the text. Should I revert and append a reference to the manpage of openssh where that feature is described?
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=ssh&sektion=1 option "ssh -R [bind_address:]port:host:hostport"
Cruzzer ( talk) 10:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Re: Power supply unit (computer): the calculation is explained in the next sentence. Otherwise, the other result is not explained either. Glrx ( talk) 17:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
By this logic, the following pages should also be removed, correct?
The list goes on ad nauseam, and that's only the computer related things! The fact is these drives are extremely hard to find information on, instead of removing a list that's a challenge to maintain, we should allow everyone to help grow the list like all these others... Isn't that the spirit of Wikipedia anyway? I created this list out of frustration over not being able to find a good list that shows all available, or even most of the available M.2 SSDs, which I'm currently in the market for. My original plan was to put the list on one of the forums I frequent, but then I thought 'this list would best serve everyone if it was available on an unbiased site where anyone can contribute to it'... There is only one place I know of like that — Preceding unsigned comment added by DracoDan82 ( talk • contribs) 15:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey everyone! DracoDan82, trust me, I understand your intentions and associated confusion, so please allow me to explain a bit further. Oh, and by the way, please sign your posts on talk pages. :)
Let's start with the definition of "encyclopedic"... As we know, Wikipedia has grown into a medium-sized :) monster when it comes to its Manual of Style and the set of rules articles need to follow, thus it's important what those rules say, not what a dictionary definition of "encyclopedic" might be. :) That's how every system works, and one must play by the rules of a system; luckily, Wikipedia's rules are truly awesome when you compare them to the rules of many other systems. Also, Wikipedia's rules can always be discussed, improved and potentially changed by the principle of establishing a consensus.
Regarding the first batch of "List of XYZ" articles, I totally agree with Jeh that almost all of them are clear candidates to be nominated for deletion. Let's just have a look at the Comparison of stackable switches article, for example – that article looks almost like a bad joke, as not even 25% of the available stackable switches are covered there. At the same time, that article should be called Comparison of stackable Ethernet switches instead, as there are also things like FibreChannel switches, for example – not all switches are Ethernet switches. It's always better not to have a list-of-XYZ at all, rather than having an incomplete and outdated list. On the other hand, lists are almost always badly updated, so they eventually become outdated.
At the same time, when a certain manufacturer (or even a model) is left out from the List of microwave owens, for example, such a list clearly becomes a favoring of other manufacturers (or models), what slowly creeps into the field of adertising. And, we're not here to advertise anything. :)
Let's have a look at more examples from the above. Comparison of Linux distributions is also a true mess, filled with pretty much outdated information; I've tried to clean it up once, and gave up quickly as I by no means have internal knowledge of 50+ Linux distributions, while becoming familiar enough (and staying familiar, for later updates) with each of them would be a very time-consuming (and pretty much pointless) thing to do. Of course, there are people on Wikipedia who have deep knowledge of all those Linux distributions—such people wrote the associated articles—but they either don't care about updating the Comparison of Linux distributions article or don't even know that it exists. Thus, sooner or later, all those lists turn into a mess.
Now, let's have a look at the second batch of "List of XYZ" articles, and compare it to the batch #1. The second batch has a much better reason for its existence, as each of the articles lists products coming from a single manufacturer, or a single line of products made by a specific manufacturer. Thus, even if a product or two are missing from such lists, that doesn't turn into advertising, what's a good thing. However, I'd never rely solely on the data available from the List of Dell PowerEdge Servers, for example, and instead I'd always go to the manufacturer's website; however, sometimes even the manufacturer introduces various changes to available server models that aren't even available on its website (and you become aware of them only after you've purchased a server – BTDT). With all that in mind, it's quite hard to expect "List of XYZ" articles to be always up-to-date. However, I'd say that the batch #2 doesn't deserve to be nominated for deletion, as it serves the purpose of an initial look-up for a particular product line.
Then, how does all that apply to the List of M.2 SSDs? Of course, that would be a good question. :) Well, if we had List of Crucial M.2 SSDs (or even List of Crucial SSDs) instead, I might vote for having such an article; though, it would be a quite short article. :) With the List of M.2 SSDs, there's simply too much room for turning it into advertising, especially as M.2 SSDs are currently a somewhat "hot topic" and a few manufacturers (as always) are trying to dominate the market.
Thoughts? — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 06:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Ironically your revert comment came at a point I was fixing the same issue. See reworked version which should be simpler and more direct, and better tone (you probably saw it just now).
See what you think, fix what you need to, but try to avoid wholesale "plain reverting" :)
I look forward to discussing anything you want to, on the t/p later. FT2 ( Talk | email) 14:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kpatch. Since you had some involvement with the kpatch redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- intgr [talk] 10:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
HI, this is my first reponse on a talk page, please forgive me if I mangle this submission. I found your TSX page quite good. I was wondering if you have an affiliation with Intel or have a contact with someone responsible for TSX at Intel? Regards, AndrewX – 12.15.146.127 ( talk) 13:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
There you go violating BRD again. Your reversion to your text (after your change was reverted) is considered edit warring. The next stage is supposed to be "Discuss". It is not BRRD. Jeh ( talk) 07:26, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
As discussed in Talk:Hard disk drive § Highlights In History Section, bulleted list from the Hard disk drive § History section is now converted and compacted into a table, please check it out. At the same time, the troublesome footnote has been deleted. Looking good? — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 08:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
In a recent edit to the page Transactional Synchronization Extensions, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/1338/are-collective-nouns-always-plural-or-are-certain-ones-singular Little Professor ( talk) 18:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding to discuss a disruptive IP-hopping editor that edits Nvidia-related articles. The thread is Disruptive edits by IP-hopper on Nvidia-related articles. Thank you. — Jesse Viviano ( talk) 17:40, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
You're very welcome. Now I wonder what you think of my edits to your edits. One is basically a revert. :-)
As mentioned in the edit comment, other than forgetting the final "s" on "suspects", I really was quite fond of that description of the reason for PING packets "This avoids the need to send a large DATA packet if the host suspects the device will just respond with NAK." If that's actually unclear, I'm curious how you interpreted it. Anyway, I tried a different phrasing. (Good reference finding, BTW.)
One change I wanted to make, but haven't found the right words for, is to split up the two uses of "non-standard" in the cable plugs table. Mini-A to micro-B is weird, but perfectly reasonable. A to A may exist, but you can't talk USB over it.
Another thing I'm tempted to do is mark the mini plugs as deprecated, tinting the column & row headers, and switch the compatibility matrix entries to green. To me, that reflects reality a bit better. What do you think? – 71.41.210.146 ( talk) 20:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I linked the entries as I did on the dab page IML because WP:DABPIPE encourages linking the article itself, rather than redirects. ENeville ( talk) 22:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello - I notice you've undertaken a lot of work to build out the F5 page...nice work. Could you help me? I am wondering where the content for "history of software development" originates. I cannot find the sources and I am wondering if you are the brother of Bojan Simic and getting content from him. Any help you can provide is appreciated. – Jaim Harlow 17:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Just a heads up to let you know I responded to your request with a question. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks you for your comment in revert in Duff's device with link to WP:COMPNOW. I think we should somehow mention in introduction that this method was used in 1980-s and in early 1990-s, but can be harmful for modern optimizing compilers (it creates very complex CFG - control flow graph - which should be deoptimized back into simple unrolled loop before compiler can optimize it in correct way)... a5b ( talk) 17:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Chealer continues to edit-war [2] [3] on the Heartbleed article, even though I've asked them numerous times to discuss their changes on the article talk page, yet they still refuse. I'm not sure what to do next. Do you have any ideas? A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 23:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I think 'class="hintergrundfarbe6"' is a color code for the cells. I borrowed the tables from a German Wikipedia page haha, the class may not apply here. Thanks, again, for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jchap1590 ( talk • contribs) 23:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Hard disk drive § An End To The RAMAC Price Duologue. Please help end the duologue on capacity and price of the IBM RAMAC Model 350 disk file. Thanks. Tom94022 ( talk) 21:49, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
{{anchor|2-clause}} === {{anchor|2-CLAUSE}} 2-clause license ("Simplified BSD License" or "FreeBSD License") === Content ... ...
Hello. I assumed that {{
anchor|2-clause}}
and {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
are hidden anchors and "#2-clause license ("Simplified BSD License" or "FreeBSD License")"
is an explicit anchor, which is the opposite to a "hidden anchor". Maybe I got wrong, maybe you meant "anchor with an all capitalized name" by saying "explicit anchor"? --
Tomchen1989 (
talk) 23:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
<span id="Section title" class="mw-headline">Section title</span>
{{
anchor|2-clause}}
and {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
are explicit anchors, and "#2-clause license ("Simplified BSD License" or "FreeBSD License")"
is an implicit anchor, just the opposite to what I thought LOL. Whatever.. Thank you for clarifying this. I'm aware of these concepts and techniques, I just didn't know what you meant by saying "explicit anchor". <a name="link_here"></a>
(btw no whitespace is allowed in name or id attribute in the specification) was used, but now it is not supported by
HTML5. Although the template's name is {{
Anchor}}, it renders as a <span id="link_here"></span>
rather than an anchor element <a></a>
in HTML actually.{{
anchor|2-clause}}
{{
anchor|3-clause}}
{{
anchor|4-clause}}
with lowercased names, but we only have {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
with a uppercased one. There should not be too much {{
anchor}}. As a shortcut, one {{
anchor}} for every section title is usually enough. It is reasonable to remove that "isolated" (no other anchor with uppercased name) {{
anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
I guess. I don't see using all-uppercase name for anchors is conventional at all. Unless if it's an unwritten but relatively conventional approach used or advocated by even a small majority of editors, I don't think it's good to use uppercase names.--
Tomchen1989 (
talk) 00:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC){{
Anchor|2-clause}}
in the
BSD licenses article, I've contributed to the whole confusion by looking at the Wiki code by clicking on "edit" links right to the section titles; this explicit (or however it should be called :) anchor is placed in a separate line before the section title, what makes it invisible when a section is edited. I totally agree that {{
Anchor|2-CLAUSE}}
is then redundant, but according to documentation of the {{
Anchor}} template additional anchors should be part of the lines that contain section titles (== {{Anchor|EXAMPLE}}Section title ==
, for example).<a href=""></a>
anchor, or the URL "http://...", rather than the thing we are talking about)<a href=""></a>
. However the word is largely used and may considered OK){{
Anchor|2-clause}}
is outside the section and invisible when the section is edited, I put all those anchor templates inside their related section titles. --
Tomchen1989 (
talk) 10:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)#ABC
in a URI works only with <a href=""></a>
if there is no additional JavaScript code that would handle the page positioning. With all that, MediaWiki's "anchor" is pretty much unrelated to true HTML anchor elements – it's more of an abstraction of that concept, if you agree.{{
Anchor|...}}
templates
into section titles! —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 20:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Hey, I just wanted to offer my apology since my edit summary wasn't as polite as it could have. Sorry about that and glad that you took it so well. Cheers! -- uKER ( talk) 02:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Nice job on the Docker, it looks much better now! Best, -- Nabak ( talk) 16:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
What about the Sony Xperia Z3 and the Sony Xperia Z3 Compact? -- Jobu0101 ( talk) 20:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I know HHVM is defined as HipHop Virtual Machine in that article; I meant exactly what I said, which was that no pronunciation is given. My point was that, as a native English speaker, I can see no way to pronounce "HHVM" other than as an initialism.
I admit all that was a bit unnecessary, so, sorry for such a wordy edit summary in the first place; but I digress. To get to the point:
{{
Redr}}
or only the single-rcat templates?-- SoledadKabocha ( talk) 00:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
{{
R from initialism}}
was totally fine.{{
R from initialism}}
also refers to itself with a capital R. At the same time, I'd usually leave such edits to Wiki code unchanged, but I've used that more to quickly
comment back. Not a great way to do that, I know; hopefully you find that acceptable. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 02:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)Thank you. I've been trying for a few years in the Turkish language. I know Wikipedia, but I do not have much English :( -- Fsandlinux ( talk) 19:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
I think the guy you just reverted was referring to the fact that Google officially announced Lollipop for the N4 a couple of days ago. -- uKER ( talk) 12:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello again, there, sir! I was wondering if you would be able to provide assistance with improving the RAID-Z section (which was) in the non-standard RAID levels article. the information was unsourced and has been deleted by another user. I feel this is an important topic on the subject of non-standard RAID and would like to ask for your help in recreating the section. Thanks, in advance, for any consideration. Jchap1590 ( talk) 07:33, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Dragan,
I found your Picture of a small Voltage and Current Meter for USB-Connections on Wikipedia: File:USB voltage and current meter.jpg.
As I am preparing an article about Charging of portable devices from different sources and especially the Problems the User should be aware, I am asking you two questions:
I am awaiting your kind reply. kind regards, or as Radio Amateurs around the world would say: vy 73.
Hartwig Harm, DH2MIC http://dh2mic.darc.de [in German :-( ] mailto: dh2mic@darc.de — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.148.215.15 ( talk) 16:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
The request about Wikipedia style and naming looks confusing. 84.127.115.190 ( talk) 23:52, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
My friend Dragan! First of all, I see that you have been recognized by one of my few other Wikipedia buddies QWERTYVS [or is it QWERTYUS ?]; and so I draw your joint attention to the anomalous Wikipedia entry on the movie "Red Planet Mars", which movie (which I have just viewed on Youtube) was a quite heartfelt and anomalous comment on the possibility that compassion is a universal reality! But the Wikipedia entry itself is way, way out there! Synchronist ( talk) 05:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for reverting your changes to Ethernet. I mistook 1BASE5 for 10BASE5. I don't think I would have made this error if you had linked to StarLAN instead of 1BASE5. I'm tempted to change that. Do you have any objection? ~ KvnG 15:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Widefox; talk 18:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Category Linux kernel on Commons is empty, actually in use category Linux-Kernel. -- Victor •talk 18:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC).
I saw your desire for a lowercase username on
your user page. While not technically possible for the reasons you state, you can somewhat fake it by adding {{
Lowercase title}}
to your user page and user talk page, then changing the capitalization in your signature. This is just merely a tip from your friend who also prefers a lowercase username. –
voidxor (
talk |
contrib) 20:57, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Don't feel bad about making this error; even native English speakers make it all of the time (myself included). The problem is English spelling—not you! May I suggest the following userbox? – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 21:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Code | Result | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
{{ User:Asarlaí/Userbox spelling reform}} |
|
Usage |
Months ago, I wrote a review about Dsimic. I have defended this user when he made a good decision. Now, I would like Dsimic to reflect on his contributions; I am aware of what has happened in Linux distribution. 84.127.115.190 ( talk) 06:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm not looking for support. I'm trying to warn people (and give accurate info) about the FACT that PAD, a game enjoyed by millions of people several times a day on Android, will not be playable for them once they allow the upgrade to 5.0. Since you're well-established here, perhaps you can add that info in the appropriate ways and places? To those who play the game (and those seeking facts about ART vs. D.) it is significant. Thanks! JT ( talk) 02:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The HDD article concerns HDDs, not SSDs. HDDs less than 100 MB aren't common, because they're largely obsolete. Cluttering the article with SSD-specific provisos and eventualities is not justified. It just adds clutter. SSD formatting should be addressed elsewhere, not here. 71.128.35.13 ( talk) 22:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Could you weight in on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DDR5 SDRAM, since it seems that nobody feels qualified to "vote"? Thanks! Thue ( talk) 18:45, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, there is broken link in article in Ref. #3. -- Victor •talk 19:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC).
Dragan, I have for the first time found it necessary to stick a fork in something -- see my recent edit to the "Semantic Search" article. The guys at IDMARCH are giving semantic search a bad name, and so I have tried to follow the BOLD directive -- but perhaps there was a better way? Synchronist ( talk) 04:41, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Since you made the solid-state storage redirect, just notifying that because I have been informed there are some other kinds of non-drive storage (cards) I turned the SSS page into a disambig. Was wondering if you know any other types, or if I am wrong and other forms of solid-state storage like the SD Card might be considered drives in some way. -- 64.228.88.135 ( talk) 01:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, both illustrations in this article are out of date: as if OpenBSD "quit" :) in mid-2013, as if Mac OS X is not OS X now and v.10.10, etc., etc... You may answer in Gr. Lab. -- Victor •talk 08:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC).
We don't know its cache system until we see the actual product in fall 2015. Before that we'd stick with current info. Please do not edit this unless you're an employee that works for Intel. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.33.215 ( talk) 08:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
{{
Citation needed}}
. However, it's quite unlikely that the L1 cache in
Skylake is going to be bumped to 128 KB, but the time will tell whether that will be the case. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 08:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC){{
Citation needed}}
may be removed if the sources haven't been provided for extended periods of time, and in this case no sources have been provided since October 2014. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 18:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)Hi. I saw that you deleted the addition about PDF pages on WP:Citing sources, on the grounds of avoiding browser-dependent stuff and/or needing more explanation of where it works. As far as I know it works in all popular browsers, including the built-in PDF viewers and Adobe plug-ins for Chrome, Firefox, IE, and Safari. And according to SourceOhWatch (SrotahaUvacha), who originally added it, if a browser doesn't support it, then it degrades gracefully with the browser displaying the first page.
I added a comment to Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#PDF page links, with a link to a PDF explaining these hash URIs. If you know of any browser-dependent issues, could you leave a comment there? Otherwise I'd like to put it back. Thanks. – Margin1522 ( talk) 15:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Don't do this again. It is pointlessly antagonistic. There is nothing which makes an editor look less suitable for collaborative development than this sort of idiotic revert war. The rationale behind keeping the case is that if the link is somehow transformed such that the piping is no longer necessary (such as in "Interface" in your example, where the pipe trick means the piped text can be omitted entirely in the edit) it doesn't accidentally enter wrongly-cased text. If you've some control issues with your life that you need to work out, do it somewhere else. Argh, and this was going so well. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
{{
Lowercase title}}
only displays lowercase titles while reading articles. Thus, following the Wikipedia's approach down to piped article links makes things more consistent; the text to right of the pipe is what's to be displayed, while the text on the left is pretty much Wikipedia's "key" for the linked article. In regular non-piped links, using a lowercase title (where appropriate, of course) actually determines what's displayed, with automatic conversion into article "keys" (capitalized titles) when a page is rendered and actual URLs are generated. In other words, using "keys" in piped links stays to Wikipedia's (externally visible) internal way of referencing articles.[[Article|article]]
also be used?" Because only the first letters in article links become automatically capitalized, no matter what, and that can be relied upon to produce valid "keys". At the same time, repeating pretty much the same string twice would be overly redundant.[[Article|article]]
was not a suggestion for something like that to be used, but exactly the opposite; that was just a self-asked question for my reasoning.[[Article|something]]
form is much more commonly used than [[article|something]]
. Thus, capitalized form is far away from being "not in common use". —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 13:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Just saw your edit on
restrict
with the pithy description "Hm, doesn't look like an improvement". How is marking an example as flawed (is not actually an example due to other issues) even if one cannot (maybe just then) add a correct one, *not an improvement*? I reverted your edit.
94.220.161.15 (
talk) 22:57, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
restrict
in place, the pointers can still overlap or be the same as restrict
is merely a hint to the C compiler. Additionally, could you please elaborate a bit on how and why the example in
Restrict § Optimization section is broken?Hi, re this edit, mousing is a word, see wikt:mouse#Verb. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
In early computer the CPU it was the only unit that handed all the system. The only "clever" unit. All passed through the CPU (memory accesses, interrupts, etc.). So that the name "central". To day the function of old CPUs is to execute only the "instructions" of a program and no other. It is equivalent to another processor, for instance Disk processor, Graphic processor etc., just only with a different task. The correct name would have to be "instruction processor" but it is called shortly only "processor". We have Intel processor, PowerPC processor etc. but no one recall the term CPU, why ?. Because it is obsolete. Please does not to confuse the term "central" with the "main" meaning, that is the most important processor just only because execute the instructions that are the main function of a computer. I am a super expert in the computer field, mainly in multiprocessor e NUMA system with several patents (more than twenty: find: Ferruccio Zulian patent). I have collaborated with Olivetti, IBM, General Electric, Honeywell, Bull, AT&T, NCR during more than 30 years as computer architect with more a tens design systems. In wiki there are many not correct information written by no not expert people. Ferry24.Milan ( talk) 19:37, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi!
I just read in Wikipedia about ECC memory. Under solutions it lists ECC memory and RAM parity memory. But I find the wording misleading, because the memory itself is not performing the ECC nor the parity algorithm. The memory only offers an extra-wide memory bus (typically 72 instead of 64 bits). The error detection and correction is in all cases a feature of the CPU / the memory controller which creates the parity bits and writes them to the extra-wide memory bus. Upon a READ, the controller receives the data including parity bits, verifies and corrects the data then continues it's processing of that data.
I think it is not clear enough on Wikipedia that ECC/parity are mainly microcontroller-features, just because of the wording "ECC memory", "Parity memory"
But in fact there is now new DRAM-memory on the market with 'on-chip integrated ECC error correction'. See http://www.intelligentmemory.com/ECC-DRAM/ . These ECC DRAMs really perform the complete algorithm inside the memory components on their own. They do not require any special microcontrollers with parity or ECC functionalities, nor an extra wide memory bus is required. Upon a WRITE to the ECC DRAMs, they generate parity-bits and store them separate from the data into an additional memory-area. On a READ, they logic on the ECC DRAMs performs the hamming algorithm and outputs verified&corrected data.
The interesting thing about these ECC DRAMs is that they are 100% compatible to JEDEC standard DRAM components. They can be used in any existing application on the market, no matter if the memory controller is having a 8, 16, 32 or 64 bit bus, and no matter if the controller has own features to handle ECC or parity.
I did not feel comfortable trying to change the Wikipedia entry as my mother-language is not English. Additionally, I work for a company that is distributing the products of Intelligent Memory and I really do not want the Wikipedia page to look like 'advertising'. Still, I am fascinated by the technology and find it worth mentioning. If you would like to work on some changes, I am ready to help and provide lots of input (how about a block diagram explaining the way 'on chip integrated ECC' works?). I am in the memory business since 23 years and can surely support to make some things a bit clearer / more correct.
Regards, Thorsten Wronski t.wronski@memphis.ag 80.156.59.106 ( talk) 15:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Totally agreed, as the purpose of ECC memory is to recover from singe-bit errors. If having single-bit errors from time to time would be seen as a sign of bad DRAM, that would mean it is possible to manufacture perfect DRAM that would never ever encounter bit flips – and as we know, that's pretty much impossible.
Everything shows that ECC DRAM is they way to go, either through native hardware support or by using DRAM chips with integrated ECC functionality. Hopefully more equipment manufacturers will share the same point of view. :) Do you, maybe, have any insights why there aren't any laptops with ECC memory? That's very strange, and I'd be extremely happy to pay even a significant price premium for such a laptop.
The silent (or not so silent) corruption you're experiencing in data storage is really interesting. Does the manufacturer of storage system you're using have anything to say? I wonder how would Btrfs or ZFS perform in such an environment... Is the overall storage capacity and number of HDDs something you'd be comfortable with sharing here? — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 07:44, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't mind sending out samples to them, but Phoronix is very much related to standard comsumer PC hardware, while the ECC DRAM makes most sense in the area of industrial, military, medical, automotive, avionics, networking and other electronic devices which use DRAM chips rather than modules. However, anything that helps creating an awareness will be fully supported by me. Do you know the people there and can brief them a bit and then ask them to contact me? Otherwise it becomes a 'blind call' which is less effective.
And if you have ideas for industrial markets, let me know as well. I like the Wikipedia idea generally, but it has to be carefully created in a way that 1) people searching for ECC technologies find it and 2) it does not appear as a promotion.
It could fit well as a new point 5.14 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_random-access_memory and also mentioned in point 6 of the same entry. What do you think?
And it could fit into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamming_code under point 5 ("see also") and point 7 (references). Maybe even a point "implementations" could be added referring to integrated ECC on DRAM by Intelligent Memory as well as to integrated ECC on SRAM memory by Cypress (they have done it for some of their SRAMs. Let me know if you need the link)
Do you dare to add/modify these Wikipedia entries? 80.156.59.106 ( talk) 13:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I'll try to find some "flaky" candidates for the "transplantation" of DRAM chips. You're right, there are countless other models of Wi-Fi access points / routers, and none of them is free of lockups and misbehavior; in other words, that's a huge market for ECC memory, with potentially huge benefits for the mankind. But, how to convince people that ECC memory is beneficial, that's the hard thing... :) That's why I've suggested all those steps for increasing the level of public awareness. — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 13:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Password Saeba Ryo (
talk) 12:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi. User:Password Saeba Ryo has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of User:Janagewen. -- Claw of Slime ( talk) 12:13, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
I invite you to this page to discuss that should the consistency of talk pages of IA-32, x86 and x86-64 should be kept! Because I've seen you as one of most active editors there. So thank you! Remover remover ( talk) 15:14, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Was this really necessary? To boost your edit count? I added the tag and reason; do we need to start nitpicking over a period? WP:OWN -- 82.136.210.153 ( talk) 08:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing me to WP:NOTBROKEN. I remember when people insisted to avoid all redirects but it was years ago and I see that things have changed since then. I'll keep that in mind. Thanks and best regards. —Rafał Pocztarski, Rfl ( talk | contribs) 19:20, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry I couldn't be of any help. @
Chealer didn't seem to be interested in providing a concise viewpoint or participating in the process. With this being the case, I doubt a third opinion would have been any help.
I hope this can be resolved as you both continue to have a
discussion. If not perhaps another route of
dispute resolution would be more helpful.
Anyhow, I've enjoyed the correspondence I've had with you, and hope it all works out.
—
Lightgodsy(
TALK
CONT) 09:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Linux distribution shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Suggesting that the behavior of other editors constitutes "trolling" may be interpreted as a personal attack. Working towards a resolution usually yields better results. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. -- Chealer ( talk) 02:43, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for nothing, and there you go. — Dsimic ( talk | contribs) 02:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic (whoever you are...)
The PC/104 Consortium's Specifications are FREE...- not like PICMG and others, but currently (and getting this changed is effort by the Board of Directors, as a change to the byelaws!) they require a REGISTRATION.
You have actually uploaded a document that you are not really allowed to share, but I can't be bothered to change this - AGAIN!
I also do not really agree that HyperLink to a HISTORIAL - for PC/104 - important person, like Rick is "SPAM", but then I am a newbie to Wiki edits.
I only landed on the PC/104 Wiki page by mistake. However, it would make sense to spend some more time on this. You seems to be interested in PC/104, so would you possible be interested in adding more information to this??
All the best
Flemming@Sundance ( talk) 09:46, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Flemming Christensen Flemming.C@Sundance.com Managing Director Tel: +44 7 850 911 417 Skype: Flemming_Sundance Web: www.sundance.com
Sundance Multiprocessor Technology is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 2440991. Registered office: Chiltern House, Waterside, Chesham, Bucks, HP5 1PS, England
I got all busy down a twisty road, in the cold, cold world of raw encyclopedic maintenance, and I forgot all about what a wonderful person you are. You deserve some kindness, and to never question whether your overall efforts are admired and appreciated.
— Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 11:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I was glad to be able to help you the other day. If you don't mind returning the favor, I made a call for comments over at List of distributed computing projects. Thanks for any input you're willing to provide! – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 05:59, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You asked why assembly language was delinked in Microcode. I gave the reason in my edit summary, WP:OVERLINK, because it already has a link further up the article in the "The reason for microprogramming" section. - Lopifalko ( talk)
Please have a look at Talk:Dd (Unix) § Non encyclopedical text in section Data recovery and check the remarks about the content about the "Data recovery" section as you have been a co-author of that section. Schily ( talk) 15:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The other OSes aren't listed below. The example is OS only, DOS is similar, but CMS is different, IIRC. Peter Flass ( talk) 17:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
If you are not that busy, if you think it worthy answering me. So would please tell me why you think Transmeta should be sorted with Pentium 4? Of course I believe that you have enough reasons. Computerfaner ( talk) 12:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
OK, I've return that table to its previous revision with modifications from Guy Harris. Yeah, this time is fare for everyone to make a new start. Thank you for your response, and you are free to deal with it on your own behalf. Computerfaner ( talk) 12:58, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up my language. One thing I've seen done (required?): "[m]obile.." vs. "Mobile.." or "mobile".
"It might be better to leave out such comparisons and stay with as neutral statements as possible", I assume you mean ×4 and ×3. I'm just not sure people realize this. What I really want to include is someone saying Android's installed base is more than all others, not just more popular in a given year. Given these numbers it probably is but no one checks. Just comparing is not, not neutral I think, and allowed "basic calculations". Based on the next previous source. Not sure I should make a big deal of this, posting here and not at the talk page. comp.arch ( talk) 11:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
For your numerous citation contributions to RAID, Standard RAID levels, Nested RAID levels, Non-standard RAID levels, and Non-RAID drive architectures, as well as your energetic copy-editing of those articles, I gladly award you the Editor's Barnstar! Way to go and keep up the good work! – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 06:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC) |
Hey Dsimic, I created the pages GNU Guix and Guix System Distribution. Do mind contributing to them when you get a chance? -- WikiTryHardDieHard ( talk) 13:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
You say that BIOS is "clearly an initialism." But the OED says that an initialism has "each letter...pronounced separately" which is not true of BIOS. Even if there are definitions of "initialism" that do not require that, there is still an ambiguity between those definitions and the OED definition. The word "acronym" has no such ambiguity and is thus superior. -- Jtle515 ( talk) 01:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
My friend; You might not like what I have added but (as I've said with my last edit). I appreciate very much if we discuss first at the talk page and you edit later. Please undo your last editing and lets discuss; That's how things are done here at WP right? ;-) Pxe 213 37 84 214 ( talk) 14:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I fixed File:ATX PS signals.svg drawing. It is shown in ATX and Power supply unit (computer) in English Wikipedia. It took me numerous hours to fix it, since it was the first time I used a SVG editor. I listed detailed changes in the photo upload history. Anyway, I noticed that you previously edited these articles, thus is why I'm letting you know. If you see any technical mistakes, please let me know. You don't need to reply nor contact me, unless there are problems. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi.
I think I should let a few (hopefully) interested editors, such as yourself, know about Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 31 § Microsoft Office 2016 because the RfD tag was deleted and the discussion is about to be closed in a day.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 04:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that a beginner user (Gelmo96) was edited the page Dhcp and now you are reverted his editing. Perhaps the procedure followed by Gelmo96 is not correct, but reading the textual content of the page Dhcp you can see that every DHCP message has the broadcast destination (Dest=255.255.255.255) although in the image file:DHCP_session_en.svg some messages are "unicast". Thanks for your kind help. Fabuio ( talk) 20:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
File:
pages, and they can be created manually. However, this only works where there is no file of that name (if there is a file, any uses of the redirect show the redirect's file, and not the target file -
Bugzilla:14928).Thanks to User:Dsimic for the research. I removed the labels and uploaded a new version of the file. I object to deleting my original work because the proposed replacement slaps a CC-SA license over a minor modification of my PD-licensed original. While that is legally OK, I find it unethical (because of the attempt to remove the more liberally licensed original) and want to keep the PD-licensed file accessible. ~~ helix84 14:21, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that " Comparison of current ARM cores" is a subset of " Comparison of ARMv7-A cores", except for the ARM11 column, thus I consider it redundant and put in a request to DELETE the " Comparison of current ARM cores" article. If you are interested, please comment at " Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of current ARM cores". Thanks in advance. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 20:40, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I believe your recent edits to the article shingled magnetic recording go against the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Specifically:
I would like consensus to be reached about these edits. I side with the MoS as outlined above. IsaacAA ( talk) 14:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
There seems to be an edit war going on user. Kapibada is adamant that 5.1 is unofficial however does not give any significant proof that it is unofficial. I will re-add 5.1 segment. Looking for your advise as you seem to manage that page for long. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debasish Dey ( talk • contribs) 21:46, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Sounds better. Peter Flass ( talk) 13:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
I reverted your
again. As I explained in my previous edit summary, per
MOS:SERIAL, articles should be internally consistent in their use (or disuse) of the serial comma. There's no ambiguity in the original wording that would necessitate a serial comma, so your change does not make the article "better" or "more readable" in any way. In essence, you're changing that sentence from one style to another based on nothing but your own personal preference, which is expressly forbidden by
WP:MOS.
If you wish to make a case for the use of a serial comma in that sentence, please do so here (or on the article's talk page, if you wish). Re-doing an edit after it gets reverted is strongly discouraged (
WP:BRD).
Regards,
Indrek (
talk) 23:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic, Re [4], you asked me to read User talk:Dsimic#Piped links. So your justification for making that edit is that both Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) and I disagree with you, and there's no basis in policy or guideline?! (In fact, articles often suffer with unpiped links incorrectly using a capitalised link, so it is a common thing to fix when unpiped, and a piped one is no justification for using the incorrect case). Because it's so obvious there's no consensus for the principle you believe in, but it is too trivial to edit war over, I suggest you reflect on the sound justification for using the correct case for links that Chris and I agree on, appreciate that the tone is harsh but appropriate, and try to refrain. Keep up the other good work, regards Widefox; talk 11:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Dsimic, I have noticed you were contributing to the post "host card emulation". So thank you as you have helped clean up the post. However, there has been a recent onslaught on the post by a few individuals that seem to really want to promote a company called "CardsApp". I am not as well versed in wikipedia posts as you so I was hoping you could help clear this page up and return it to a previous version where "CardsApp" is not doing self promotion.
Kindly, Theodore9dw ( talk) 06:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Dear Dragan,
you use Wikiviewstats for calculating viewership of your articles. As I know, this tool is offline since months. How have you used it for Feb '15 data?-- Kopiersperre ( talk) 17:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Processing Address generation unit: done. (total 739 views)
Processing UniDIMM: done. (total 1,580 views)
Processing kdump (Linux): done. (total 861 views)
Processing kernfs (BSD): done. (total 220 views)
Processing kernfs (Linux): done. (total 649 views)
Processing ftrace: done. (total 919 views)
Processing Android Runtime: done. (total 10,933 views)
Processing WebScaleSQL: done. (total 802 views)
Processing HipHop Virtual Machine: done. (total 5,003 views)
Processing kpatch: done. (total 1,314 views)
Processing kGraft: done. (total 1,094 views)
Processing CoreOS: done. (total 9,104 views)
Processing ARM Cortex-A17: done. (total 2,167 views)
Processing Port Control Protocol: done. (total 1,174 views)
Processing zswap: done. (total 959 views)
Processing Emdebian Grip: done. (total 324 views)
Processing ThinkPad 8: done. (total 468 views)
Processing Laravel: done. (total 9,352 views)
Processing OpenLMI: done. (total 382 views)
Processing Open vSwitch: done. (total 3,384 views)
Processing Distributed Overlay Virtual Ethernet: done. (total 457 views)
Processing Management Component Transport Protocol: done. (total 562 views)
Processing Buildroot: done. (total 784 views)
Processing dm-cache: done. (total 1,899 views)
Processing bcache: done. (total 1,291 views)
Processing SATA Express: done. (total 14,692 views)
Processing OpenZFS: done. (total 1,511 views)
Processing List of Eurocrem packages: done. (total 120 views)
Processing M.2: done. (total 36,447 views)
Processing Eurocrem: done. (total 702 views)
Stats fetched for February 2015: total 109,893 views, 3,924 views per day (28 days in month).
<syntaxhighlight lang="php">
and </syntaxhighlight>
) and paste it into a file – that's the latest version of the actual program code. :) The current version might work too slowly when fetching statistics for 750 articles, so please let me know how fast it works once you get it going – it should be possible to make it much faster by using
HTTP pipelining through
curl_multi_exec()
. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 11:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)Fetching statistics data: ... done.
- Address generation unit: total 739 views
- UniDIMM: total 1,580 views
- kdump (Linux): total 861 views
- kernfs (BSD): total 220 views
- kernfs (Linux): total 649 views
- ftrace: total 919 views
- Android Runtime: total 10,933 views
- WebScaleSQL: total 802 views
- HipHop Virtual Machine: total 5,003 views
- kpatch: total 1,314 views
- kGraft: total 1,094 views
- CoreOS: total 9,104 views
- ARM Cortex-A17: total 2,167 views
- Port Control Protocol: total 1,174 views
- zswap: total 959 views
- Emdebian Grip: total 324 views
- ThinkPad 8: total 468 views
- Laravel: total 9,352 views
- OpenLMI: total 382 views
- Open vSwitch: total 3,384 views
- Distributed Overlay Virtual Ethernet: total 457 views
- Management Component Transport Protocol: total 562 views
- Buildroot: total 784 views
- dm-cache: total 1,899 views
- bcache: total 1,291 views
- SATA Express: total 14,692 views
- OpenZFS: total 1,511 views
- List of Eurocrem packages: total 120 views
- M.2: total 36,447 views
- Eurocrem: total 702 views
Done, February 2015 statistics for 30 articles fetched in 1 second.
Total 109,893 views, averaging in 3,924 views per day (28 days in that month).
Done, February 2015 statistics for 144 articles fetched in 14 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 618 articles.
curl_multi_setopt($handles, CURLMOPT_PIPELINING, 0);
and curl_multi_setopt($handles, CURLMOPT_PIPELINING, 1);
on line 72? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 15:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)CURLMOPT_PIPELINING=true:
[..]
> Russian Chemical Reviews: fetching data FAILED!
> Tricyclazol: fetching data FAILED!
Done, February 2015 statistics for 246 articles fetched in 16 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 516 articles.
CURLMOPT_PIPELINING=0:
[...]
> Josiphos: fetching data FAILED!
> Carteolol: fetching data FAILED!
Done, February 2015 statistics for 263 articles fetched in 20 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 499 articles.
CURLMOPT_PIPELINING=1:
[...]
> Chevron Phillips: fetching data FAILED!
> 2-Methylbenzylchlorid: fetching data FAILED!
Done, February 2015 statistics for 263 articles fetched in 13 seconds.
Fetching the views statistics failed for 499 articles.
Mysterious-- Kopiersperre ( talk) 16:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
> ftrace: failure (Could not resolve host: staats.grok.se)
> OpenZFS: failure (Could not resolve host: staats.grok.se)
> kernfs (Linux): failure (Could not resolve host: staats.grok.se)
> Eurocrem: failure (Protocol "hhttp" not supported or disabled in libcurl)
> dm-cache: failure (Protocol "hhttp" not supported or disabled in libcurl)
[..]
- Leptophos: total 10 views
- Journal of Polymer Science: total 7 views
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Dimepiperat: failure ()
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Maleimid: failure ()
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Nicosulfuron: failure ()
> Tetraethylenpentamin: failure ()
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Dichlon: failure ()
[many undefined offsets]
PHP Notice: Undefined offset: -1 in /tmp/run/verboseviewstats.php on line 597
> Chanda: failure ()
> 10,10′-Oxybisphenoxoarsin: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Dichlormid: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Benoxacor: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> International Journal of Medical Microbiology: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Thidiazuron: failure (Connection timed out after 10002 milliseconds)
> Refratechnik: failure (Connection timed out after 10001 milliseconds)
[other 10001 ms timeouts]
> Befehl Nr. 227: failure (Connection timed out after 10000 milliseconds)
[other 10000 ms timeouts]
> Dimethylchlorsilan: failure (Connection time-out)
> Lothar Kühne: failure (Connection time-out)
> Cytec: failure (Connection time-out)
> Tributylmethylammoniummethylsulfat: failure (Connection time-out)
> Alexander Tamanjan: failure (Connection time-out)
[..]
/
not to be URL-encoded as %2F
. Got that fixed in a
new version, I'd appreciate if you could test it out. Also, this version implements easier selection of the encyclopedia/language for all specified articles. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 15:56, 8 March 2015 (UTC)I created a proposal for moving Yahoo! to Yahoo. If you have a minute, we'd appreciate your input. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 09:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dragan, remember Intelligent Memory and the ECC DRAM discussion we had?
Now I just noticed you also handle the Wikipedia entey for the Broadwell architecture. Per Intel specs the Broadwell-U only supports max 16GB of memory by two memory slots (8GB per memory module). But there is an internal Intel document that explains how this can be doubled. The memory has to fulfill special requirements for that, because the Broadwell-U internal memory controller has a little "bug". A standard memory module with 16GB could be unstable. Intelligent Memory has the first 16GB modules that work in all the new notebooks and laptops that are now coming to the market and use the i3/i5/i7-5xxxU CPUs.
On the Wikipedia page about the Broadwell I find nothing about the memory-support, but maybe you have good reason for that!? One reason could be that the Broadwell-U has the chipset and the CPU together on one SOC, while other Broadwells separate that. The memory support depends on the chipset. Am I right? If that is correct then adding something about the memory-support of the Broadwell-U might be too complex or confusing for readers. Twmemphis ( talk) 16:17, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
If you have time, can you offer an opinion or evaluation about the 209.6.201.191's message in User talk:Donner60 § IceCream Apps is spam. I replied about general editing guidelines but I really don't have the expertise to evaluate the complaint about the existing article as being spam. I had reverted the edit because the IP user had replaced general language with extremely negative language. Perhaps some of the complaint has merit but the language and type of edit needed to be reverted. If you don't have time or interest for this, no problem. Donner60 ( talk) 01:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
Third-party}}
. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 08:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Hi. You reverted some changes to Docker (software) where " [ sic]" was removed from after "on premise" in a quote. I wanted to justify the removal and see if it might change your mind. (It's a small thing and doesn't matter to me either way, so feel free to ignore me.) Checking Google Ngram Viewer, the use of "on premise" seems on the rise. A cursory glance at books using "on premise" shows it's used in the same sense as "on premises". It's also a common phrasing in cloud computing contexts. Yes, I'm aware prescriptivists say it's not grammatically correct, but that's beside the point. " [ sic]" is used to proactively deny a transcription error has occurred, but is unnecessary if there's no reason for that assumption. I'm trying to argue that (given the context and rising usage of the phrase) there is no reason for readers to assume there has been a transcription error, and thus " [ sic]" may be safely removed. 128.205.39.37 ( talk) 16:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
This is a very-long-ongoing issue of a banned user. It's a wp:deny effort. No issue here with you or others undoing my reverts. See User:Arthur Rubin/IP list and the current discussion on Arthur Rubin. Many edits are OK, though often strange, if not bizarre, such as linking the British Pound symbol "£", or New Zealand while ignoring other countries. It's OCD v. OCD! Cheers Jim1138 ( talk) 07:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I consistently see you around computer related articles (and that one third opinion) and would be interested in your opinion on this deletion discussion, if you'd care to give one there. — Lightgodsy( TALK CONT) 23:06, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, most of people refers to the operating systems based on Linux kernel as Linux. however Linux is just a kernel, a piece of code written by a finnish guy with contributions of many people around the world, to make any OS able to use a lot of devices. it is true that the operating systems based on Linux belongs to the Linux family of operating systems as cited there: /info/en/?search=MOS:LINUX#Linux_vs._GNU.2FLinux, but that doesnt mean that Linux is a real entire OS. many geeks know that Linux is a kernel and dont say that it is an OS. for example GNU is the most free OS used today which missed a kernel and than gets combined with Linux: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html.
When you say that you use Linux when you use a Linux based system like GNU or Android, you mean then that the Linux developers has written the entire OS and released its binaries and all the applications running in the system, which is wrong. Debian GNU/Linux is an OS, Android is too, Chromium also. Please stop writing wrong informations about operating systems, that affects the knowledge of many people which is not nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kb333 ( talk • contribs) 14:22, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Can you have a look at this redirect. We have an editor who seems to be trying to turn it into a very COI/POV article against consensus. - Ahunt ( talk) 14:45, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
R from incorrect name}}
. Hope you agree with the tagging. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 15:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)By my count you haven't broken 3RR but you should be aware of the report I filed at ANEW. BethNaught ( talk) 18:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Dear Dragan, you probably already know about this, but when you have a chance, please check out the additions to the "Criticism and comment" section of Deep learning and the article referenced therein -- I would rather that my friends take the first shots at all of this! And be sure to take a look at the first footnote of the article proper. Synchronist ( talk) 23:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
First of all thanks for editing my post. I am fairly new to wikipedia so accept my apologies if what I am asking is obvious. Can you please let me know why did you change the title of my post "ARMOR: A Hardware Solution to Prevent Row Hammer Error" to "A Run-time Memory hot-row detectOR"? I believe the first title gives more information to the user who is looking for a solution to this phenomenon. Also, you changed the link directly to the solution page rather than home page. Can you please explain the reason?
Regards, Mohsen Ghasempour ( talk) 19:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey man maybe you can give me your opinion on this clarity/redundancy goal on an edit, see Talk:LAMP (software bundle)#Discussion of how to refer to LAMP. makeswell ( talk) 01:01, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
You obviously have good ideas but I'd say this time, it didn't quite cut it. IMHO, "Required sources" is not a suitable title for a subsection of "Avoid common mistakes". It implies that providing sources is the mistake; but we should say the reverse: Forgetting to provide sources is the mistake. (The original title was "not providing sources".)
But one of your other edits was so good that I imitated it in another section. And your edit in the x86 was in fact good, even though I changed the section, because it made me realize new things. Cheers. Fleet Command ( talk) 08:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
You recently undid some of my edits removing ipsec.pl references. The references are being used as a form of self promotion, the site in question is operated and written by the editor that added them to the articles. The links he is adding the write ups to notability and frankly the information he is linking to is poorly done, hence my reasons for removing them. Offnfopt (talk) 06:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi.
Do you know of any computer-related publication called "PC home Advanced"? I suspect it is a typo but I don't know what could be the correct form.
If you want a little background, this is mentioned in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IZArc (2nd nomination) as an evidence to keep the article.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 17:51, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Dragan, it's me, Glenn! (BTW, I read your article on distributed data base systems -- some solid work!! -- and have gleaned from it your gmail address, which I am obviously not using at the moment.) At any rate, I have set a trap for Big Foot! See my user page for the fun . . . Synchronist ( talk) 05:24, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank You, this edit requires to click the diagrams. I suggest to undo it to keep the diagrams visible without a click. See the German version "Deutsch" of the article where it was possible to lineup 2 images or a gallery with the option called "floating" at the right side. The help:gallery_tag and help:pictures do not address how to do this. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 20:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Multiple image}}
template. The reason why
I've moved all images into a gallery is simply because there are four images in the relatively short
Power supply unit (computer) § Functions section, and that's pretty much the only way to keep the section layout reasonably clean. However,
this layout change should present some kind of a compromise, increasing the size of thumbnails while keeping all four images in a gallery. Hope you agree. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 22:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC){{
Multiple image}}
was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you! I guess, it is soved
[6] and You have a higher resolution on your screen than my one, so please review. --Hans Haase (
有问题吗) 11:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)Hi, Dsimic. I was wondering what reference errors the Python example that I added to the documentation for Infobox programming language introduced. Because I didn't see any reference errors when I was changing the infobox, and I'm pretty sure I would've spot them if there were any reference errors. Also, the Scheme example felt kind of outdated, and I just thought that the example needed an update. Thanks. Kamran Mackey ( talk) 01:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Infobox programming language}}
's documentation? However, if you insist, I can live with the Python infobox example. Speaking of the reference errors, as you've already noted in
your edit summary (and what's nicely visible in
this diff), it was about having undefined named reference tags that caused a number of messages in red at the bottom of the page, which are clearly visible in
this revision. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 02:07, 8 May 2015 (UTC)Hi Dragan, after updating the Linux Storage Stack Diagram, I've found now that you put quite much effort in correcting typos in the former old version of the diagram (I've found the discussion at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop/Archive/Apr 2015 § A high-level overview of the Linux kernel's I/O stack). Thank you for your work here! We plan to update the diagram to Kernel 4.0 in the next 2 weeks, I'll include your feedback there. Best regards, Wfischer ( talk) 09:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Peripheral devices do not "primarily interact with humans". Anything outside of the CPU and main memory is considered a peripheral device. This includes hard disk drives and tape drives. Note the wording in the standard, quoted in the section on ATA-2. Jeh ( talk) 19:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Why did you revert my change at USB Type-C when a section named "USB Type-C" of the redirect's target exists? Someone added the section to page USB last month. At the time you created USB Type-C as a redirect, it was not there. I redirected to USB#USB Type-C so that readers could focus directly on USB Type-C. I also moved the anchor TYPE-C to the section, in which I placed {{Anchor|USB Type-C}} inside. I have already checked the edit history of the redirect page before I updated the redirect. Give reason for reverting other than to repeatedly say Explicit anchors are preferred, as they stay effective even if sections are renamed in your edit summary. -- 24.6.161.63 ( talk) 23:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Anchor}}
template) are much better in redirects than section titles. If the article sections are renamed later, split into two or more (sub)sections or altered in another way, explicit anchors are moved to appropriate new positions in the article (exactly as
you did it after
USB § USB type-C subsection has been split off from
USB § USB 3.1), with already existing redirects still working without requiring any changes to them.====={{Anchor|TYPE-C}}USB type-C=====
. The "TYPE-C" anchor seems to be customary by you, but you are not only one that prefers this. I notice that another editor created a redirect as
USB#TYPE-C at page
Type-C. I mean the text USB#TYPE-C.<!-- Some redirects point here, do not modify. -->
right below the sections such redirects point to. That's simply wrong, as nobody knows later how many such redirects are there in case such sections need to be renamed, and that requires digging through the "what links here" to keep such redirects working. In other words, IMHO things people do naturally are not necessarily the best things to do.{{
Anchor}}
template, instead of the anchors implicitly created as a result of placing section headings. Maybe that wouldn't be everyone's choice of a modifier, but it seems logical to me: implicitly means that something hasn't been required explicitly. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 22:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC){{Anchor|TYPE-C}}
text would appear between /* and */ (which renders section linking) in edit summaries. It is undesirable, unlike tags such as <this>. The page should redirect directly to a section currently named "USB type-C", not "TYPE-C", which I think is too broad. It is unclear to me whether the capitalized term most commonly refers to a new type of USB. --
24.6.161.63 (
talk) 23:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)/* {{Anchor|PD|PD-R1.0|PD-R1.0V1.1|PD-R1.0V1.2|PD-R2.0V1.0}}USB Power Delivery */ The devices have increased power requirements, not increased energy requirements, fixed error.
generates "
→{{Anchor|PD|PD-R1.0|PD-R1.0V1.1|PD-R1.0V1.2|PD-R2.0V1.0}}USB Power Delivery: The devices have increased power requirements, not increased energy requirements, fixed error." in edit summary. Clicking the "→" will take us to that section, but there is no such section called "{{Anchor|PD|PD-R1.0|PD-R1.0V1.1|PD-R1.0V1.2|PD-R2.0V1.0}}USB Power Delivery" in the USB article. (
diff link) That is what it is broken if the section is in fact "USB Power Delivery". Regarding one of your edits to the USB article, did you actuallly delete the part of "{{Anchor|TYPE-C))" in edit summary when you edited the section "USB Type-C", in
this diff? --
24.6.161.63 (
talk) 06:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)I added this cause it is not a simple closed 1x connector and the photo quality is better than the present one. Somebody disrupted the description and the you removed it. --Hans Haase ( 有问题吗) 21:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Not to discredit your efforts, you totally missed the point, i.e., education of newbies. The frames of a motion picture were included to explain the multitasking concept to newbies who are likely to misconstrue the term multitasking, said term often being interpreted as simultaneous, e.g., texting and driving, in the popular media. The CPU, no matter how configured, must interleave chunks of multiple processes. Just as a camera switching back-and-forth between incomplete scenes will.
Note: My object is to make the concept clear and comprehensible, not to impress fellow IT professionals with recondite distillations of fact. For a professional who does not need it, your definition suffices. However for a newbie, it's too tight, and self-contradictory, even. That said, I'm butting out, as you've made quite a spectacular effort at various corrections, and I honestly don't have the time to engage. We'll go with your edit. But it, no offense, could be better. 99.246.121.36 ( talk) 00:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for diff 663477834. Please, check the global edits of the user, this was massive change in several wikis (I fixed ru: and de:) - [7] a5b ( talk) 02:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic! I did partially revert your changes to Standard RAID levels and Nested RAID levels. I do not see that use of the {{ n/a}} template as being the intended use, since in neither table are the cells actually not applicable.
If your concern is that the {{ Depends}} and {{ Unknown}} templates are too boldly formatted, I happen to agree with you. However, I don't agree that the appropriate fix is hacks or manual cell formatting on the article side; rather, the template should be changed (with discussion, of course) so that your concern is addressed globally, and consistently. – voidxor ( talk | contrib) 20:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
Depends}}
and {{
Unknown}}
templates is much better than
"customizing" the {{
n/a}}
template. However, those two templates might benefit from a modification that would make them stand out less, which applies especially to the {{
Unknown}}
template that makes the table in
Nested RAID levels § Comparison section look almost funny. Though, that might be just up to the table being almost empty? Perhaps the {{
Unknown}}
template actually looks good in tables with only a few empty cells, where its visual appeal is actually desirable, so it shouldn't be modified at all? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 21:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Current look | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
---|---|---|---|---|
Proposal #1 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
Proposal #2 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
{{
Dunno}}
makes the table look much less "busy". I've been thinking more about those templates, and it might actually be good to have a little bit more "flashy" {{
Unknown}}
template so it actually draws attention of people who might actually fill in the voids. That way, once the empty cells in
Nested RAID levels § Comparison section lose their majority status, we might actually want to go back to {{
Unknown}}
.{{
Yes}}
, {{
No}}
, {{
Good}}
or {{
Bad}}
, as visible in
Template:n/a § Templates, for example) so turning the text in the only exception (which is {{
n/a}}
) into black might be actually more feasible. Thoughts? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 11:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC)Proposal #3 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
---|
{{
Depends}}
is actually a possible answer, whereas {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
are for cells in need of answers, and {{
n/a}}
is for cells that will never receive an answer. Therefore, I would vote for graying-out {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
as is shown in proposal #3, yet leaving {{
Depends}}
and {{
n/a}}
as is. We might make {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
<small>
to further lessen their busyness.{{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
serve the same purpose. I would support a merging these redundant templates. One would simply be redirected to the other to keep existing code working. –
voidxor (
talk |
contrib) 23:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Proposal #4 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
---|---|---|---|---|
Proposal #5 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
Proposal #6 | — | ? | Unknown | Depends |
{{
n/a}}
should have its label in black (as visible in the proposal #4), as that template represents pretty much a definitive answer: "not applicable" or "not available" (for the latter, in the sense of "no such thing", not "unknown"). How about that? Of course, I'd support the merger between {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
templates. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 23:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC){{
Dunno}}
/{{
Unknown}}
is that the latter can be answered. However, I don't really care if {{
n/a}}
uses black text or gray. I feel much more strongly that {{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
could stand to be merged, grayed out, and made <small>
. The appropriate place for such a discussion appears to be
Template talk:Table cell templates. I'll let you make the proposals, after which I will vote. It might be wise to reference this discussion in your proposal, so that we disclose our working together and brainstorming beforehand. –
voidxor (
talk |
contrib) 05:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC){{
Dunno}}
and {{
Unknown}}
, a thought about why the merger might not be favorable just crossed my mind: different cell widths. In other words, having two templates that produce "fill me in" cells with labels of completely different widths might actually be good so the narrow one can be used where the space is tight, and the wide (and more descriptive) one where the space isn't an issue; that's somewhat similar to how
MOS:DATEFORMAT allows month names to be abbreviated in tables. Also, here are the proposals #5 and #6 above, which show how those two templates look with <small>
, and to me they look much better that way.Dear Dragan: given my established interest in a re-integration of art and technology, I've started an article on the ShareSpace foundation. Should be interesting to see how it's received. Synchronist ( talk) 04:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I noticed my input on performance improvement was undone. Could you please clarify and advise so I can update it so that it is acceptable? Thanks Rob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robpater ( talk • contribs) 01:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
There are no run levels in most modern Linux anymore so the "Default runlevels" should be trimmed down (the edit you reverted) or marked as historical. Please let me know your thoughts.-- Tim ( talk) 14:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry for the edit conflicts caused. I need to be offline for a while. I'll catch up with the discussion later. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 23:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Flexible_array_member&curid=44866380&diff=663078633&oldid=659100780
The value is: it avoids people telling "but it _does_ work in c++!!!" (because their gcc accepts it). Sources? Well, I just found something about "zero length arrays" as a GNU extension for pre-99 C. It does not mention C++ for this feature. :-( -- RokerHRO ( talk) 15:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dismic: U recently added to the HDD External Links section three articles covering quite low level HDD technical details. There are hundreds of such articles going back many years so I wonder if such detail is appropriate for Wikipedia? If so, where do we stop? Didn't want to just revert without talking - yr call. Tom94022 ( talk) 17:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Deleting OCaml software category wasn't justified IMO. Look here: https://github.com/facebook/hhvm/tree/master/hphp/hack/src. It's almost entirely written in OCaml and that category is specifically for such cases. 89.42.64.133 ( talk) 10:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
@
-prefixed warning-generating "soft" parameter or return type annotations into regular annotations that generate recoverable errors:
Hello, we noticed you have edited lots of the storage pages (M.2, SATA Express) and wanted to give you the inside scoop on U.2 and enlist your help to make the wikipedia page great! I started a draft U.2 (SFF-8639) page that is in review by Wikipedia. I don't really know what I'm doing on Wikipedia though. I am the product marketing manager for Intel's data center SSDs, and have been driving the direction of the storage market. You can see my knowledge of storage ecosystem here: http://www.nvmexpress.org/presentations/
News on U.2: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/sff-8639-u.2-pcie-ssd-nvme,29321.html
Any way to expedite the process of review so we can start editing it up? I also have no clue how to upload pictures.
You can reach out to me on LinkedIn if that works for my email. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmhands ( talk • contribs) 00:21, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Articles for creation! We are a group of editors who work together on the Articles for creation and Files for upload pages.
A few tips that you might find helpful:
Once again, welcome to the project. Anastasia [Missionedit] ( talk) 21:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Dragan, the entirety of my contribution to Deep learning was removed two days ago (see /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/99.42.64.25 ), and the only reason I mention it to you is because I'm not sure this action was on the "up and up". But if you don't have the time to take a look, I'll see if maybe QWERTYUS can step in. Ironically, this removal of material linking art and AI comes at a time when there is a huge new burst of interest in the subject; see, for example http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/18/google-image-recognition-neural-network-androids-dream-electric-sheep. Synchronist ( talk) 03:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
Diff}}
template to have a link like
this one. It is also advisable to always provide brief
edit summaries; for example,
this edit would benefit from a brief description. Hope you agree. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 05:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)Can you read what your placing Not only inaccuracies but anything true stated in devious misleading manner. Did you just copy it from somewhere? If you are not intentionally doing what I have stated above. Slow down and Read what I have summited and see if you really have understood how to state what's going on When represent signed numbers (grade school + or - integers) by what are integers in this S_N_R. Michael Ali theturk ( talk) 07:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for planning on adding more references! I appreciate it, it'll measurably improve the article. -- Yamla ( talk) 19:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dragan,
The Virtual machine was a mash of 2 distinct concepts, with essentially no overlap: system virtual machine (OS virtualization etc.) and process virtual machine (JVM etc.). Thus I split them into two articles, and was in the process of cleaning them up. Shall we discuss at the article talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbarth ( talk • contribs) 17:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Discussion on the talk page could improve the article (better than reverting mindlessly). If you find that quality adjusted price information from the Federal Reserve Board is in wrong section, I thing that moving it to the right section would help. 71.128.35.13 ( talk) 22:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello - I got a notice that said User:217IP was patrolled by Dsimic. Could you clarify what this means? I am unfamiliar with it in the context of users - normally people patrol pages for changes. Thanks! 217IP ( talk) 15:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
You have deleted several mentions of Kaby Lake because it is a rumor. However, you have not deleted all the additions of 670221421 ("Cannonlake ... put on hold indefinitely") and 670668783. Please be consistent. Also, I do not understand the comment of 670598820. What is the complete sentence? Especially, what "doesn't fit" with what? Visite fortuitement prolongée ( talk) 19:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Blade (templating engine). Since you had some involvement with the Blade (templating engine) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Compassionate727 ( talk) 19:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Run-time polymorphism, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo, or other unlikely search term.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that
administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{
hangon}}
to the page and state your intention on the article's
talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
Compassionate727 (
talk) 19:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
{{
R with possibilities}}
when there simply isn't enough encyclopedic content available to justify separate articles? That isn't helpful. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 20:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Hi. This is Codename Lisa! I missed you during my absence. How do you do?
If it isn't much trouble, could you please take a look at the move discussion in Talk:Virtual disk? I feel it needs more contributors and I have already tried all channels of notification short of inviting interested parties. (Hopefully, you count as a potentially interested one.)
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 07:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
What's the general or your personal gain, if you remove example use paragraphs such as mine from the ipkg article? It was far away from being a HOWTO. And is it really, really necessary to eliminate such paragraphs? I personally find it really convenient to have almost everything I need in a wikipedia article. You are not going to cut down the wikipedia to exactly your need, are you? -- johayek ( talk) 12:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Minor redirects aren't bolded in WP:R#PLA. Widefox; talk 23:33, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
The Half Barnstar | |
For your cooperation with other editors while contributing to Wikipedia. I have seen many editors squabbling over minor edits. You are different. It seems to me that you focus your energy on improving Wikipedia rather than socializing. We need more people like you here. Keep up the good work. Chamith (talk) 12:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, I've undone your undo of my edit. Please stop doing that. I've unified the reference style on that article. I can assure you that no one is reading the references in the source of the articles. Thank you, Dawnseeker2000 14:23, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect PU2RC. Since you had some involvement with the PU2RC redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Sanpitch ( talk) 14:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I saw that you undid
675603800 on the Shellshock article:
Undid revision 675603800 by Regagain (talk) Those capable of producing patches and applying them on their own would be rather advanced developers, not ordinary users
I agree with you, however, I still think the current wording of this sentence is misleading, and even wrong. For the record, here's the quote from the
source:
If you're an advanced enough user to have enabled the types of services that can be exploited by Shellshock, you're also likely advanced enough to turn those services off for now, or to patch bash yourself using Xcode.
Compare that with the sentence as it is right now:
Such advanced users are typically capable of turning the services off until a patch built using Xcode can be implemented.
It does not mean the same thing at all. I think we should update it to something like:
Such advanced users are typically capable of turning the services off until an updated is available.
Do you agree (or do you have a better suggestion? :-))
Regagain (
talk) 17:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello. You created Bay Trail (microarchitecture) sometime ago. According to the current version of Atom (system on chip), Bay Trail is a platform for the Valleyview chip. Visite fortuitement prolongée ( talk) 12:32, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
About this edit, I just used a script that does this all the time.. Must be ok? If you're right the script needs to be changed. Unless I'm sure you're right, I'll not be cleaning up after the script.. I might if I heard a logical/good reason.. Doesn't seem to matter much. comp.arch ( talk) 09:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Shellshock_(software_bug)&oldid=676626126&diff=prev - actually, the reference is right after this sentence - just press ctr+f and enter "american" or "afl-fuzz". Do you still have anything against this edit? Deetah ( talk) 10:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
You are one of the most extreme editors on Wikipedia. Instead of shortening the exteneded list a little (and not just to your own need) you are inconsiderately and simply reverting my contribution a little like a tyrant. Why don't you rename the article to "Dsimic's article on dynamic linking"? Who are you? A ingenious smart-ass professor in Computer Science?-- johayek ( talk) 12:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Could you please see bottom of those pages:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.223.130.175 ( talk) 14:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Could you have a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing#Help with merge. Someone seems about to do a copy-and-paste merge of Prefetch buffer into DRAM. Copy-and-paste merges are nearly always a bad idea and in this case the AfD outcome of a "merge" looks like an unwise conclusion to me at best. — Ruud 16:15, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
In reply to this revert. In general I agree with you, but please see the edits made by this user: Special:Contributions/Zhanghaohit. This is a single-purpose account only promoting their own publications, often adding multiple links to the same article. This is a textbook example of WP:REFSPAM and should not be tolerated. -- intgr [talk] 08:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Please can you go and check the Device file article again and remove the unbalanced tag you added? As I’ve explained (again) on the Talk page for that article, Linux really does behave the same as traditional UNIX; the only difference is that, by default, it only creates block devices for disks (just as FreeBSD only creates character devices). The only Linux-specific aspect other than that is that, because character device behaviour is genuinely useful for disks, the Linux kernel added an O_DIRECT flag that you can use to open one of its block devices in raw mode (i.e. as if it was a character device). Well, that and the existence of the raw driver, which lets you explicitly create character devices for the benefit of software that doesn’t know about O_DIRECT. I’ve added coverage of those facts to the article, as well as a remark about the use of the term "raw device" (e.g. in the Solaris manuals) to refer to character devices; I’m pretty certain this addresses your concern about balance. – Ajhoughton ( talk) 16:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Jerod Lycett ( talk) 16:40, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Antarctic krill | |
Penguins eat krill! (and some fish and squids) Kıverti qwerty ( talk) 12:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC) |
Erm, re edits like this [8]. The syntax of my edit [9] was generated - so I suggest you take your "fix" up with the edit icon bar developers. The stats indicate that [10] we edit many similar articles. In fact, your edits are often closely following mine to the extent that I'm starting to feel that your edits are following my edits a bit too closely (see WP:HOUND). Does that chime with you? Widefox; talk 12:59, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
That argument is logically flawed - it's contradictory/mutually exclusive: it can't be both a) a trivial editor preference AND b) sloppy. It can't be both a} irrelevant AND b) important (enough to fix). Pick one. If a) then why do it, if b) where's the consensus? There's consensus for the opposite of your style changes. Crucially, it's the gratuitous and/or bogus nit-picking that's disruptive to collaboration. If you feel you must compulsively make these changes to a large watchlist, after being told not to by several editors, yes, it's LISTEN / WP:IDHT. You're an experienced editor, you know how it works here. Widefox; talk 11:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix on the semi-colon. Missed that! 206.82.167.3 ( talk) 20:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
By the way, I'd appreciate if you would try not to pick on me on every possible occasion; what I did here was pretty much fine and according to the WP:BRD guideline.
Your first instinct, every single time someone disagrees with you, is to revert to your preferred version. Every single time, whether you made a change initially or not. In cases like this guideline, this gives you precisely the first-mover advantage that BRD is designed to avoid. Combined with your utter intransigence regarding the most petty nonsense (like this explicit linking that that Widefox is discussing in vain with you once again above) this means that pretty much any article you're watching becomes de facto under your stewardship and thus that editing it takes an order of magnitude longer. What I really wish is that, as with 99.9% of other editors on the site, the very first thing that I did not see every single time you were involved in a discussion was a notification saying "Your edit on X was reverted by Dsimic". Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 08:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic,
I found that my recent edit on Intel HD Graphics has been undone. I'd like to know which part do you consider redundant?
I added those info because the HD Graphics performance of the same silicon, say GT2, differs with and are constrained by different SKU TDPs. And Intel obviously gave branding numbers proportional to performance. Adding TDP info helps explain why the same silicon differs in branding.
For the lack of refs, maybe we can add a link to Intel's spec, though the relation to branding numbers may be not that obvious at first sight. Jsli ( talk) 04:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
This is Materialtechnology can you unprotected the O+ USA? Please!!! Materialtechnology ( talk) 01:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Could you clarify this edit of yours? It appears you restored without explanation material that Hullaballoo Wolfowitz claims is copyvio. I agree (based on google-search for some phrases) that there appears to be extensive copyvio, which seems to be par-for-the-course for the editors who contributed that content. DMacks ( talk) 05:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Row hammer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cirt -- Cirt ( talk) 06:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
You know, I though all web requests have a "/" prefix. Like in "/?title=User_talk:Dsimic&action=edit§ion=new" or "/wiki/Special:Watchlist". As long as we are taking about requests, IMHO, it is a prefix. But when we are talking about the whole URL, it becomes an infix or, if alone, a suffix. Fleet Command ( talk) 03:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Third one down in "Notes and exceptions". And "dates back" to a date in the past is a extra inessential superfluous unrequired unneeded surplus tautalogical redundancy. ;P Belle ( talk) 12:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
About this one and others. You reverted sometime ago also (Stagefright?). I was going to ask you. I generally put commas after years and the Android article does too. Then I see also like "A 2015 report, states..", an exception where the comma is postponed. Maybe in my case I was wrong. This isn't a major deal, just not good that I keep putting them in (out of (misplaced?) habit, and you having to take out..).
I'm not natively English speaking (and your name doesn't sound like either, but it seems your English is excellent/better than mine) but I'm not sure that is the issue. I noticed e.g. SciAm doesn't use commas ("In 2015 something.."), can't remember a counter-example except here at the moment. This is a "style guide issue", and maybe more appropriate for encyclopedias.. I looked up another random article and it does use commas after years but not consistently..
While I'm here, could you look over Julia (programming language). I didn't put in the banners.. maybe they are fair (or not)? Even, besides that, do you know of any specific WP rules for computer [programming languages]? comp.arch ( talk) 18:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
On 12 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Row hammer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the row hammer effect has been used in some privilege escalation computer security exploits? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Row hammer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 03:03, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I added some information to Talk:Computer program#Microcode Programs Should Be Removed in answer to your question about millicode, but that section could be a bit tl;dr, so here's what I posted there:
There's probably other stuff out there, including IBM papers in the Journal of Research and Development, if you're willing to spend USD 31 per paper. (IBM used to provide access to IBM JR&D papers for free from their site, but they've outsourced that to the IEEE now, and just about everything the IEEE has is behind a paywall, although they do at least make the 802 standards available for free.)
And, yes, it's architecturally the same sort of thing as PALcode - machine code executed in a special mode, with instructions implemented using {PAL,milli}code not being executable in that mode, and with access to special processor-dependent instructions and registers available - although, as Rwessel noted, DEC had a specific set of instructions architected as "traps to PALcode" in Alpha, while "this is done in millicode" is an implementation detail. DEC also did page table walks in PALcode rather than hardware; there's probably no reason IBM couldn't do that in some particular S/390 and z/Architecture implementations, but I don't know whether they did or not.
The millicode for POWER/PowerPC/Power ISA is just low-level ISA-dependent and possibly processor-dependent subroutines provided by the OS in a way that lets you quickly call them and get the version appropriate for the machine on which you're running. OS X, at least on PowerPC, had the "commpage", which was a region of the virtual address space shared between the kernel and userland, at a fixed virtual address, containing some routines where the implementation was processor-dependent for performance reasons; I think the routines were at fixed virtual addresses, so the code didn't have to know where they were. I seem to remember that a notion like this went back at least to Multics, with the pl1_operators segment containing routines to implement some operations in code generated by the PL/I compiler. Guy Harris ( talk) 22:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I had thought to add Atmel Software Framework to the ASF disambiguation page: I previously tried to look up the acronym and found nothing that fit. This meaning is covered in the first paragraph of Atmel application note AT08569. [1] I frequently use Wikipedia to decipher odd acronyms, and I thought others might benefit from this addition. My first try included a reference to the app note but I got an automated 'we don't do that here'. This is my very first attempted contribution, obviously I don't have a clue. Isn't it worth having another expansion of an acronym even if it's redlinked? 172.88.224.142 ( talk) 15:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
References
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Seeing your edits pop up in my watchlist regularly gives me a warm fuzzy feeling that Wikipedia keeps getting better. Thanks! -- intgr [talk] 08:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC) |
Hello Dsimic:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
Halloween!
–
Codename Lisa (
talk) 23:09, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Dragan -- Glenn here, and I've got a beaut of a situation!
As we well know, Wikipedia maintains a set of "catchphrases" -- e.g., "sock puppet", "drive-by edit", etc. -- which are invaluable in identifying and characterizing otherwise shadowy behaviors which may be of particular harm -- or, in some cases, of particular benefit -- to Wikipedia. With this context, my question to you is as follows: is there a catchphrase which refers to the practice of re-emphasizing or re-iterating or re-cycling negative aspects of a subject which have since been discredited, corrected, and/or ameliorated by the passage of time -- and this with the effect of keeping said subject under a perpetual but undeserved cloud?
My reason for asking this question is that I would like to have a rationale for doing some corrective editing to the article on scholarly publisher MDPI, wherein there seems to me to be too great an emphasis on the fact that MDPI was at one time included on a list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers" maintained by a single individual -- the famous "Beall's list" -- even though its justification for being on the list has been disputed, and even though it has since been intentionally removed from said list.
Full disclosure: I have a stake in this matter, inasumuch as an MDPI journal has just published one of my scholarly papers; but by the same token, I have some actual experience with MDPI as the basis for my input -- and that experience has been ultimately positive in the sense of confirming MDPI's scholarly integrity.
But not only that, Dragan, in respect to my credentials as an editor of the MDPI article -- I have been in the very den of the lion! In short, I have just concluded a brief but telling correspondence with Jeffrey Beall himself -- who, to his great credit, makes his email address readily available, and who responds quickly; and I cite here, by way of documenting some of the points previously alluded to, my inititiating missive:
I do not feel it appropriate to reproduce Professor Beall's brief but gracious reply; but its import was to confirm, without futher detail, that MDPI was indeed taken off of his list as of 27 October 2015; and this further implies to me that MDPI's former presence on this list should become a footnote, as opposed to a major topic, within the Wikipedia article.
So, Dragan, I need that magic Wikipedia catchphrase; and if it does already exist, you -- with your wonderful acquired knowledge of English -- could come up with one! Synchronist ( talk) 05:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
{{
Disputed}}
and {{
Inadequate lead}}
, placed in combination with starting a discussion on the article's talk page. However, IMHO doing the following steps, if that would be possible at the moment, should be better instead of simply tagging the article:
Hi Dsimic
Saw you contributing heavily to RAID topic. Just sat through another presentation where vendor claimed "RAID is dead" due to long rebuilds and need for higher fault resilience levels. I disagree...IMO RAID is a broad technical strategy that does not mandate XOR math, does not limit to 2 or 3 'parity' fragments, does not mandate rigid mapping of a Volume to specific disks, does not mandate 1:1 recovery of failed disks.
My question to you: Do you agree? Should the RAID topic be brought forward with coverage of modern fault-resilience techniques?
A given vendor might choose not to use the term 'RAID' in the context of their object store, but that's a Marketing decision. I think the classic definition of RAID still applies.
Davis471 ( talk) 15:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC) Mike Davis akropilot@gmail.com
Hi Dsimic,
Please see the p25 of Haswell hotchips presentation, titled Haswell Execution Unit Overview. It said there is a "New Branch Unit" sharing with 4th ALU under port6. I think this new branch unit is a branch execution unit, not a branch prediction unit.
Henry Huang — Preceding unsigned comment added by HuangHe THATIC ( talk • contribs) 09:26, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Dear Dsimic,
Indeed, disk cache has two meanings. The first is disk buffer – obviously not what page cache wants to refer to, and the second one is a circular reference back to page cache itself.
Generally speaking, a wikilink should not be to a disambiguation page, unless it is the ambiguity you want to point out.
So, please, revert your reversion on page cache: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Page_cache&type=revision&diff=695806260&oldid=695803912
TIA, RickJP ( talk) 08:46, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 17:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Judging by GitHub, Nim counts. How are you judging? Judging by mature languages and current usage, it can be argued that Ada and ML are niche, nonspecific, and are actually language families (though C++ is likewise a family of non-free specs and free implementations of compilers, interpreters, etc.). Mister Mormon ( talk) 21:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Wishing you a merry Christmas and a happy new year... |
Hello, Mr. Simic. I thought I'd drop you a note explaining my edit at
GOP (disambiguation). Per
WP:DABPRIMARY, When a page has "(disambiguation)" in its title – i.e., it is the disambiguation page for a term for which a primary topic has been identified...(that topic) should not be mixed in with the other links
. Since
GOP redirects to
Republican Party (United States), it has been identified as the primary topic and should be at the top of
GOP (disambiguation). However, since you disagree with that assessment, I'd like to nudge you to make a
WP:Requested move of
GOP (disambiguation) →
GOP, and, if moved, the current (reverted) version of that page would be correct. Let me know if I can be of any assistance with the
WP:RM! Thanks, --
Tavix (
talk) 07:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
It's ok to list articles in the "See also" section that are linked in the body if their of core relevance to the article in question. You can see this in many existing articles. That said, I added CryptGenRandom to entropy-supplying system calls before I mentioned it in the article body; I'm fine with the removal. Risc64 ( talk) 18:01, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Say, you have a passion for date formats. Care to weigh in at Talk:2011–12 Saudi Arabian protests#Move page to avoid date ambiguity? That article is currently linked from the Main Page. Thanks! – void xor 20:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
I noticed your recent reverts to edits I made on the 3 NAT articles. I'm not so sure if the links are irrelevant / advertising -- they're opensource and non-commercial implementations of the protocols that each article describes.
When you have a moment, maybe take a closer look at the links. If you still think they're irrelevant / advertising, then I would suggest maybe getting rid of the Support section in NAT Port Mapping Protocol as well. If it's irrelevant to provide a list of opensource implementations of the protocol the article is about, then it's probably even more irrelevant to provide a list of end-user software and hardware (mostly commercial / proprietary) that uses said protocols in nothing more than an ancillary way.
216.19.189.212 ( talk) 02:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I am using your php program that fetches page views statistics for a while as a hobby, and I want to thank you for that. I know that the data that your php program comes from stats.grok.se. There comes now a "better" page view stats provider, which can be visited at tools.wmflabs.org/musikanimal/pageviews. This alternative website looks better, some of the reasons are (1) page view data of more than one article can be viewed simultaneously (2) it can release page view data from both desktop and mobile web. Actually, in the English Wikipedia, on the external tools of the view history tab, the page view statistics link now directs to tools.wmflabs.org/musikanimal/pageviews. The daily page view values of stats.grok.se and tools.wmflabs.org/musikanimal (desktop platform views only) differ slightly. I suggest to create a php program for this alternative page view stat provider if you are interested. They also release CSV and JSON files. CunningRabbitXenon07 ( talk) 08:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, smart guy
Okay, I think I have found a little less selfish way. Setting the alignment parameter to "right" on {{ Wide image}} creates the layout you want while avoiding the problem that I have. Sure WP:IMAGESIZE says "respect user preferences" but I guess a win-win compromise is always better.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 15:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Talk:Server Application Programming Interface, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:Server Application Programming Interface. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Ttt74 ( talk) 17:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello
I have set up User:Codename Lisa/Websites and their publishers in an attempt to improve the existing citations quality in the computing topics. Perhaps it can be a part of the Manual of Style one day. I hope you find it useful. And if you wanted to edit or contribute, I'd be honored.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 02:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
|website=
parameter instead of |work=
, in the current information layout? Using |website=
seems slightly more logical to me, while these two parameters (AFAIK) should be equivalent from the {{
Cite web}}'s current perspective. Another thing I'd like to discuss (which hinges on the first one) is whether we should somehow keep the website domain as part of the citation? IMHO, keeping the domain should be highly usable simply because many people remember the websites by their domains; as a result, leaving the domain out might be actually confusing. I'm not sure whether having both |website=
and |work=
parameters might be a solution, so the value of |website=
is the website domain, and the value of |work=
is the descriptive name of the website? —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 09:54, 27 March 2016 (UTC)|work=
is an alias for |website=
. So I use |work=
to type three letters less. But the point is, when you populate both with different values, the template ignores one and throws a CS1 exception error. (CS1 stands for
Citation Style 1.)An article that you have been involved in editing— NX Bit —has been proposed for merging with Executable space protection. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. WikiWisePowder ( talk) 21:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I was looking through IEEE papers from a 2009 conference that I attended in Dearborn, Michigan, and happened to see one authored by Dragan Simic entitled "Simulation, Design, and Evaluation of an entire Hybrid Electric All-Terrain Vehicle". Is that you, or an impostor? – void xor 02:31, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I came across the reference to storage devices as I was looking for additional sources. I wouldn't have thought of them either, but that's what the source said and it seems to make sense. Peter Flass ( talk) 17:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
This discussion should probably have gone to the talkpage for Peripheral - my fault, sorry. Peter Flass ( talk) 12:04, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
{{
Moved discussion to}}
. —
Dsimic (
talk |
contribs) 21:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)I unified the references. I think this is better readable. If you like it the other way, please unify ALL references the same way. -- 88.71.145.185 ( talk) 05:29, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Although a power supply with a larger than needed power rating will have an extra margin of safety against overloading, such a unit is often less efficient and wastes more electricity at lower loads than a more appropriately sized unit. For example, a 900-watt power supply with the [[80 Plus Silver]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 85-percent efficient for loads above 180 W) may only be 73% efficient when the load is lower than 100 W, which is a typical idle power for a desktop computer. Thus, for a 100 W load, losses for this supply would be 37 W; if the same power supply was put under a 450 W load, for which the supply's efficiency peaks at 89%, the loss would be only 56 W despite supplying 4.5 times the useful power.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/2624/3 | title = Debunking Power Supply Myths | date = 2008-09-22 | accessdate = 2014-10-07 | author = Christoph Katzer | publisher = [[AnandTech]] | page = 3}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.coolermaster.com/xresserver01-DLFILE-P130218025925ba-F13032500212140.html | title = Cooler Master UCP Product Sheet | year = 2008 | accessdate = 2014-10-11 | publisher = [[Cooler Master]] | format = PDF}}</ref> For a comparison, a 500-watt power supply carrying the [[80 Plus Bronze]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 82-percent efficient for loads above 100 W) may provide an 84-percent efficiency for a 100 W load, wasting only 19 W.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/4908/silverstone-strider-plus-500w-modular-power/4 | title = SilverStone Strider Plus{{snd}} 500 W Modular Power | date = 2011-10-10 | accessdate = 2014-10-11 | author = Martin Kaffei | publisher = [[AnandTech]] | page = 4}}</ref>
Although a power supply with a larger than needed power rating will have an extra margin of safety against overloading, such a unit is often less efficient and wastes more electricity at lower loads than a more appropriately sized unit. For example, a 900-watt power supply with the [[80 Plus Silver]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 85-percent efficient for loads above 180 W) may only be 73% efficient when the load is lower than 100 W, which is a typical idle power for a desktop computer. Thus, for a 100 W load, losses for this supply would be 37 W; if the same power supply was put under a 450 W load, for which the supply's efficiency peaks at 89%, the loss would be only 56 W despite supplying 4.5 times the useful power.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/2624/3
| title = Debunking Power Supply Myths
| date = 2008-09-22 | accessdate = 2014-10-07
| author = Christoph Katzer | publisher = [[AnandTech]]
| page = 3
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.coolermaster.com/xresserver01-DLFILE-P130218025925ba-F13032500212140.html
| title = Cooler Master UCP Product Sheet
| year = 2008 | accessdate = 2014-10-11
| publisher = [[Cooler Master]] | format = PDF
}}</ref> For a comparison, a 500-watt power supply carrying the [[80 Plus Bronze]] efficiency rating (which means that such a power supply is designed to be at least 82-percent efficient for loads above 100 W) may provide an 84-percent efficiency for a 100 W load, wasting only 19 W.<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.anandtech.com/show/4908/silverstone-strider-plus-500w-modular-power/4
| title = SilverStone Strider Plus{{snd}} 500 W Modular Power
| date = 2011-10-10 | accessdate = 2014-10-11
| author = Martin Kaffei | publisher = [[AnandTech]]
| page = 4
}}</ref>
I have noticed that you have removed my content GNU/Linux from the Linux distribution page. Can you tell me why? Why it can't be called as GNU/Linux? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balajisource ( talk • contribs) 17:27, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
r.e. CPU cache hmm. what I was trying to do is get 'definitive links' that define terms precisely, i.e. increasing the fidelity of link information all round (increasing wikipedias value for AI e.g. thought-vectors... it's all about labelled data, and we have a great open resource here.)
An alternative is to create a 'glossary page' for 'microarchitecture' ? I've tried doing this here, creating a Glossary of computer graphics; but the problem is I found myself replicating lots of information, and the link structure gets *more complex*, with extra indirects. So I switched to trying this.. modifying existing articles to contain more specific link targets. the 'defn/term' templates seem handy where a section per term might be overkill.
Whats the best compromise here? I would ideally at least like the redirects to hit the specify term, rather than just the heading.
>> r.e. "That "CACHE-LINES" is an explicit anchor, which is useful as explicit anchors allow redirects to continue working if sections are renamed at some point in time "
This is the point of making definitive definitions of terms - they *dont* get renamed. (you just redirect synonyms to them). Fewer symbols/names to keep track of
>> " is a great destination for non-native English speakers looking to improve their written English"
.. my thinking is increasing link 'accuracy' increases the chances of automatic translation tools improving (it's 'labelled data',& adding more 'machine-processable' structure). A redirect into the body of text itself would be a hint that the meaning of the sentence is a definition of that specific term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmadd ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I entirely agree with you. I used the visual editor instead of modifying the wiki code directly. I simply added the mention about Haskell. Yet when I saved, the visual editor somehow decided to reorganize the wiki code for the whole infobox. -- Anareth ( talk) 07:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dsimic, I have a question regarding your recent edit, https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Linux_kernel&oldid=725063821. If I'm understanding MOS:PMC correctly, than it seems that the typo should just be fixed, as it doesn't seem textually important (mentioned in the WL), so I'm curious why you used [sic] instead. -- Michael Reed ( talk) 16:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I have a proposal at Template talk:Comparison of memory cards#Proposal to transpose that could certainly use another opinion, if you care to weigh in. Thanks! – void xor 19:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I've added a section (ddAuto) which is very related to dd utility but you removed it in (Revision as of 09:54, 29 April 2016) with a justification of what seems to be promotional content. What is your suggestion to improve the section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.149.91.152 ( talk)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on HardenedBSD requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Pyrusca ( talk) 23:10, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dragan,
your tool is not working anymore since stats.grok.se is gone. I think we must port it to the pageviews API.-- Kopiersperre ( talk) 13:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Dsimic. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 00:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Dear Dragan, Two things: first, I've gotten involved with a huge new initiative ( http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/6/2/5 ) regarding which I've attempted to contact you directly; and second -- and without spending very much time at all on this, and only if you have some familiarity with Wikipedia image formattin g -- could you give me a pointer or two about how to get rid of some of the white space around the image I've added to the blast (protocol) page -- but without reducing image size? Synchronist ( talk) 17:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi.
There is an AfD entry on a software product that I opened a long time ago, but it has received zero responses so far (apparently due to a glitch). I was wondering if you'd be interested in taking a look at it. This discussion is at:
Thanks
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 12:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Should MoS shortcut redirects be sorted to certain specific maintenance categories? An Rfc has been opened on this talk page to answer that question. Your sentiments would be appreciated! Paine Ellsworth put'r there 17:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 17:42, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
I introduced a proposal at Talk:New Zealand DX class locomotive#Class register notability, and believe it could benefit from your two cents. As always, I value your independent opinion. Since this is a notability matter, I am specifically asking you because we should get opinions outside of WikiProject Trains for balance. Thanks for your help! – void xor 01:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
As you're one of the editors most active on the OpenZFS article, I especially wanted to ask your views at an RFC I just opened.
Thank you. FT2 ( Talk | email) 21:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
I am one of the contributors to the open source SSH server called Teleport. We have a fairly active and growing community and the question of starting a wikipedia page comes up a lot. I am also a fan of various OSS projects by CoreOS and noticed that you've been contributing to those pages (that you for that!), that's how I decided to reach out and ask for guidance. Do you think we can connect via Skype or Google Hangout? Thank you!
( Ekontsevoy ( talk) 16:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)).
Hi, I'm Enwebb. Dsimic, thanks for creating OVN!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for your contribution. Wikipedia depends on verifiability; please consider adding references to this page, as it currently has none.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Enwebb ( talk) 23:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you explain your change summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Default_route&diff=prev&oldid=718310978
This was one of my first larger contributions. I was a little disappointed to see it deleted. I was quite frustrated to see that the comment was nearly unintelligible. I still don't know what you mean by "feeling good". If you're going to erase someone's contribution please meet their effort halfway with a good explanation.
Cdosborn ( talk) 22:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect
ConsoleKit. Since you had some involvement with the ConsoleKit redirect, you might want to participate in
the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 21:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC).
21:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Reballing. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 10#Reballing until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. pandakekok9 ( talk) Junk the Philippine anti-terror law! 08:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I see you reverted the page I wrote for PMCI WG [1]. Can you tell why? This page was prepared by the WG itself to create a framework for all the standards developed by it (NC-SI, MCTP, PLDM, SPDM). Eliel Louzoun ( talk) 06:14, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Template:Linux layers/Test 1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 ( talk) 05:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
The redirect is being discussed for deletion. Your opinions are welcomed. Greatder ( talk) 02:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
The redirect Hardened BSD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 29 § Hardened BSD until a consensus is reached. Greatder ( talk) 11:20, 29 July 2023 (UTC)