Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
→GA Review: ping |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 53:
** I disagree. It's sourced from Tanenbaum's book. [[User:Timhowardriley|Timhowardriley]] ([[User talk:Timhowardriley|talk]]) 18:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
:* The first two sentences and one in the end of the section are sourced. Everything in between is unsourced. [[User:Artem.G|Artem.G]] ([[User talk:Artem.G|talk]]) 20:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
:** I'll work on this. [[User:Timhowardriley|Timhowardriley]] ([[User talk:Timhowardriley|talk]]) 20:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
* it's not clear for me how the last 3 images are connected to the text.
Line 60 ⟶ 61:
** This review process has given me the courage to remove dubious material. [[User:Timhowardriley|Timhowardriley]] ([[User talk:Timhowardriley|talk]]) 18:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
:* It's great! And, if you are willing to bring the article to GA, it would be great if you'll check everything written here with all the sources. The article isn't new and have a lot of stuff, so it wouldn't be fast and easy. [[User:Artem.G|Artem.G]] ([[User talk:Artem.G|talk]]) 20:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
{{ping|Timhowardriley}} I've checked the article, and though it became much better, it's still a long way from GA. The history section should be expanded, right now it consists of just a few sentences on Early programmable machines, Pascaline, and Jacquard's loom, and it's not clear how and why is it important. The part on Programming languages needs more references; Compilation and interpretation and Application software is partially unsourced. Boot program and Embedded programs consists of only a few sentences each. But Microcode programs is a big one and includes images of all the logical gates. So it's really hard to say that the article is broad and focused, not everything is given the equal attention. I don't want to discourage you, and this article is really tough, but I suggest you to go to [[WP:GOCE]] for copy-editing and, maybe, to [[Wikipedia:Peer review]] to get more specific comments. But either way, thanks for your work, now article is in a better shape than it was before!
But right now, it a failed GAN {{icon|FGAN}}. [[User:Artem.G|Artem.G]] ([[User talk:Artem.G|talk]]) 17:56, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
| |||