Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing/Computer networking task force: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:01, 16 May 2021

Latest revision as of 13:31, 30 July 2025

(18 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{talkheader|search=yes}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject Computing|network=yes}}

|}}

{{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot II|age=90|dounreplied=yes}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

|maxarchivesize = 100K

Line 19 ⟶ 20:

Thanks. — [[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]]&nbsp;{^{[[User talk:Headbomb|ταλκ]]}<sub style="margin-left:-4.0ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|κοντριβς]]</sub>&nbsp;&ndash;&nbsp;[[WP:PHYS|WP Physics]]} 08:59, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

== OpticalWanted fiber legendpages? ==

We have a repeated legend used for fiber optic topics. I beleive this is {{u|Nightwalker-87}}'s work.

{| class="wikitable"

|+ Comparison of fiber grades<ref name="TDG_ETH_2nd">{{cite book |title=Ethernet: The Definitive Guide |edition=2nd |author=Charles E. Spurgeon |publisher=O'Reilly Media |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-4493-6184-6}}</ref>

|-

! style="background-color:orange" | <small>MMF<br />FDDI<br />62,5/125&nbsp;µm<br />(1987)</small>

! style="background-color:orange" | <small>MMF<br />OM1<br />62,5/125&nbsp;µm<br />(1989)</small>

! style="background-color:orange" | <small>MMF<br />OM2<br />50/125&nbsp;µm<br />(1998)</small>

! style="background-color:#7DF9FF" | <small>MMF<br />OM3<br />50/125&nbsp;µm<br />(2003)</small>

! style="background-color:#FF69B4" | <small>MMF<br />OM4<br />50/125&nbsp;µm<br />(2008)</small>

! style="background-color:#66FF00" | <small>MMF<br />OM5<br />50/125&nbsp;µm<br />(2016)</small>

! style="background-color:yellow" | <small>SMF<br />OS1<br />9/125&nbsp;µm<br />(1998)</small>

! style="background-color:yellow" | <small>SMF<br />OS2<br />9/125&nbsp;µm<br />(2000)</small>

|-

| <small>160&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@850&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>200&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@850&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>500&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@850&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>1500&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@850&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>3500&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@850&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>3500&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@850&nbsp;nm &<br />1850&nbsp;MHz·km<br />@950&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>1&nbsp;dB/km<br />@1300/<br />1550&nbsp;nm</small>

| <small>0.4&nbsp;dB/km<br />@1300/<br />1550&nbsp;nm</small>

|}

{{reflist-talk}}

This appears as a separate copy in [[Fiber-optic communication]], [[Fast Ethernet]], [[10 Gigabit Ethernet]], [[Gigabit Ethernet]] and [[100 Gigabit Ethernet]] and in a different format at [[Multi-mode optical fiber#Comparison]]. Minimally this should be done as a template to improve maintainability. I'd go ahead and do that but I'd also like to improve this to make it clear that it is a legend. It is not clear to my eyes what is going on here with tables on top of tables. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 14:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

: Yes, this is correct. I've introduced this formatting with the intention to unify various listings in dependent articles. I am open to your proposal which seems reasonable. [[User:Nightwalker-87|Nightwalker-87]] ([[User talk:Nightwalker-87|talk]]) 16:30, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

::I assume you're referring to my proposal to implement this as a template. I suppose I can get started on that.

::Does anyone have any suggestions for making it clear that this table is a legend for color-coded cells in adjacent tables. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 17:26, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I have created {{tl|Fibre legend}} and replaced table copies with this (except for [[Multi-mode optical fiber#Comparison]]). ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 15:21, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Are any of these redlinked terms previously mentioned in {{tl|Area networks}} potentially notable. See [[Template talk:Area networks#Wanted Pages?]] ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 04:25, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

== Request for information on WP1.0 web tool ==

== [[Draft:Tranalyzer]] ==

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the [[User:WP_1.0_bot|WP 1.0 Bot]]! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the [[:toolforge:enwp10/cgi-bin/pindex.fcgi|web tool]] that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

Here's an abandoned draft on a potentially notable network topic if anyone wants to take it on ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 19:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScK30kJtKQ3cp-QLY1VJhB94HP2q6437Cdk3E2rVRYHowcL4A/viewform?usp=sf_link this Google form] where you can leave your response. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

<!-- Message sent by User:JJMC89@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/ListOfProjects&oldid=923068486 -->

==[[Draft Template:EEBUS]]IoT ==

Dear all, I just started writing my very first Wikipedia article ever. However, I underestimated the complexity and was not aware of review processes. So it seems I should have added some metainformation so that my article shows up here or in a related project, if I get things right. So, how do I get the following article reviewed? [[Draft:EEBUS]] Is this the right project? If the official answer is that I cannot skip the (currently) estimated 6 months of review, I will of course accept this. But as a newbie this is a little frustrating right now. I appreciate your help! [[User:DrJHinker|DrJHinker]] ([[User talk:DrJHinker|talk]]) 07:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey there,

:{{re|DrJHinker}} Congratulations! It looks like you have it properly queued for review at [[WP:AFC]]. The AFC process is optional for [[WP:AUTOCONFIRMED]] editors. Once your user account is 4 days old and you have made 10 edits with it, you should be able to [[WP:MOVE]] your draft to mainspace yourself. The AFC process is valuable if you have a [[WP:COI]] or are concerned about your article being unceremoniously deleted due to issues that AFC reviewers can help you resolve. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 00:27, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm drafting an [[User:François Robere/sandbox/Template:IoT|infobox on IoT]]. [Many] additions and corrections would be welcome.

== Verizon updates (5G) ==

Cheers,

Hello! I posted requests at [[Talk:Verizon_Wireless#5G_update|Talk:Verizon Wireless]] and [[Talk:Verizon_Communications#5G_update|Talk:Verizon Communications]] to update Verizon's 5G efforts. The suggested updates might interest editors of this WikiProject. As I work for Verizon and have a conflict of interest, I ask others to review my work and make edits on my behalf. Thank you, [[User:VZEric|VZEric]] ([[User talk:VZEric|talk]]) 22:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

:{{ping|Kvng}} As you seem active in this topic, would you be able to review this request? Thank you, [[User:VZEric|VZEric]] ([[User talk:VZEric|talk]]) 17:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

::Those are not articles I've done any work on previously. I'm much more active on technology topics than articles about technology companies. I have watchlisted these and will have a look when I get a chance. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 18:19, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

:::Thanks! I appreciate any feedback. I saw that you were active on this Talk page, so I thought it could possibly interest you. [[User:VZEric|VZEric]] ([[User talk:VZEric|talk]]) 12:14, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

:{{done}} {{ping|Kvng}} Letting you know this is resolved. [[User:VZEric|VZEric]] ([[User talk:VZEric|talk]]) 16:24, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

[[User:François Robere|François Robere]] ([[User talk:François Robere|talk]]) 17:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

== IP over Avian Carriers ==

:Left some comments at [[User talk:François Robere/sandbox/Template:IoT]] ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 15:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

[[IP over Avian Carriers]] concerns joke RFC 1149 about using pigeons to carry packets. Should a photo of a dead pigeon be added ([[Special:Diff/958431215|diff]]) as "An example of packet loss"? Please edit the article or comment at [[Talk:IP over Avian Carriers#Dead bird photo]]. A month ago, I semi-protected the article (now expired) and would like to stay uninvolved. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 05:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

== RFC links ==

==[[:Category:Computer networking articles needing expert attention]] has been nominated for discussion==

Please see [[Template_talk:IETF_RFC#Discussion_at_WP%3AELN_§_Templates_being_used_to_embed_external_links_into_articles]] for a discussion about external links to IETF RFCs in article bodies. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 00:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>'''[[:Category:Computer networking articles needing expert attention]]''' has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the [[Wikipedia:Categorization|categorization]] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 May 16#Empty expert subject categories|the category's entry]]''' on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|categories for discussion]] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. [[User:Peaceray|Peaceray]] ([[User talk:Peaceray|talk]]) 07:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)