Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Expanding Arch Linux ARM: new section |
|||
Line 1:
{{
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject Computing}}
}}
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects |link=Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-06-12/WikiProject report |writer= [[User:Mabeenot|Mabeenot]] || |day=12 |month=June |year=2013}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| maxarchivesize = 250K
| counter =
| archiveheader = {{Talk archive navigation}}
| minthreadsleft = 5
| minthreadstoarchive = 2
| algo = old(91d)
| archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing/Archive %(counter)d
}}
== [[Timing failure]] ==
Pease help turn this into an article. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 03:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
: Delete. It's just a [[WP:DICDEF]]. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C5:E9AC:DA01:F580:F286:F4EA:C589|2A00:23C5:E9AC:DA01:F580:F286:F4EA:C589]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C5:E9AC:DA01:F580:F286:F4EA:C589|talk]]) 16:17, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::It's been expanded and sourced. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 11:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
== Commodore 64 sales record claims ==
Several articles (such as "[[Home computer]]" or "[[Commodore 64]]") claim that the Commodore 64 is some variation of the "highest-selling computer of all time". This claim seems highly-dubious to me, is almost-certainly outdated, and likely relies on using a definition of "computer" that conveniently excludes any potential counterexamples. While the sales figures of the C64 (estimated at somewhere between twelve-million and seventeen-million units) were no-doubt remarkable for the 1980s, in the decades since computers have become far more prevalent in society so this seems like a claim that is liable to becoming outdated quickly. I can't find any recent sales figures for individual models of the Macintosh, for example, but it would be highly-surprising to me if the M1 Macbook Air had sold fewer than twelve-million units, for example. Even beyond that, there is also the matter of the Playstation 2, which is unquestionably a computer (even if it arguably isn't the same kind of computer as the C64) and sold over 150-million units. To me these claims seem as if they either need to be removed from said articles or better placed into context, although I understand if sourcing is an issue with achieving the latter. [[User:HumanBodyPiloter5|HumanBodyPiloter5]] ([[User talk:HumanBodyPiloter5|talk]]) 14:07, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
:I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Home_computer&diff=1285565792&oldid=1276173607 removed] one unsupported statement.
:[[Commodore 64]] makes a claim based on CNN reporting citing Guinness which is the sort of [[WP:SECONDARY]] sourcing we prefer. [https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/72695-most-computer-sales Here's what Guinness says]. I agree that this is either unlikely to still be true or relies on an outdated definition of ''computer''. Not sure where to go from here. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 13:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
::It seems that Guinness specify "best-selling {{em|desktop}} computer", which at the very least seems more plausible, although I'm still not convinced that these sources aren't outdated, and it seems to me as if any sales record claim is reliant on setting a fairly arbitrary definition regarding what is or isn't eligible. [[User:HumanBodyPiloter5|HumanBodyPiloter5]] ([[User talk:HumanBodyPiloter5|talk]]) 06:57, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
:Here's an even bigger claim by David John Pleasance, managing director of Commodore UK back then:
::''"There’s been a lot of conjecture about the volume of C64s sold worldwide. I can tell you categorically that the number was just a tad under '''27 million'''. I can tell you that because, when we were thinking about doing a management buyout, we got access to all the figures."''
:From [https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/the-rise-and-fall-of-commodore this article.] -- [[Special:Contributions/2804:D4B:790C:C500:44DA:1A49:9250:C118|2804:D4B:790C:C500:44DA:1A49:9250:C118]] ([[User talk:2804:D4B:790C:C500:44DA:1A49:9250:C118|talk]]) 05:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
== Significance of [[V (programming language)|V (Vlang)]] and [[Pony (programming language)|Pony]] ==
There's ongoing dispute in edit summaries and [[User talk:Remsense#Mass Edit Reversion Campaigns|a user talk page]] over adding [[V (programming language)|V (Vlang)]] and [[Pony (programming language)|Pony]] to the lists of implementations in various articles: [[Hash table]], [[Type aliasing]], [[Snake case]], [[Mixin]] and more. There are additions to quite short lists, e.g. adding V to the eight implementations in [[Hash Table]][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hash_table&diff=prev&oldid=1291992239] or to Java, Javascript, Swift and Fortran 90 as a language using the underscore as a [[Decimal separator]][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Decimal_separator&diff=prev&oldid=1291974774], and to quite long ones.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mixin&diff=prev&oldid=1291993439#Programming_languages_that_use_mixins] Could editors discuss here whether V and Pony are significant enough to be mentioned in such articles? [[User:NebY|NebY]] ([[User talk:NebY|talk]]) 17:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:These are very little known languages with tiny usage shares (significantly less than one percent). Adding content about these languages across Wikipedia is not helpful to the readers at all and mainly serves to inappropriately promote these obscure languages. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 17:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
:The "little known" argument looks false, because inclusion can be for academic reasons and to provide a diverse spectrum of information or examples for different kinds of languages, and it can be said that Pony falls under this umbrella. Particularly because of numerous academic papers on it and the famous computer scientists involved. Even under the argument that a language "must" be as generally popular as those listed on the articles in question, V arguably meets that criteria. Being ranked above various languages on [https://web.archive.org/web/20250527152413/https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ TIOBE] or above them in [https://ossinsight.io/collections/programming-language/ popularity lists for GitHub] (top 10 in the year to year).
:V is around as or more popular than Nim, Zig, D, Ocaml, Haxe, Racket, and Elixir. Languages that were included in the articles. In fact, {{tq|'''no'''}} reverts, protests, or bans were pursued or applied involving those other mentioned languages. {{tq|'''No'''}} arguments as to their significance, suitability, or questions about how well known they are were aggressively pursued or asked.
:Furthermore, the sudden introduction of {{tq|new special criteria}} (beyond the standard of notability and having a Wikipedia page) to aggressively block specific programming languages or other editors, gives the appearance of being a diversion to fairness. One in which can hide bias, the creation of de facto ownership for only select editors, or allowing only what is on their personal approved list. True, there is the opposite or various views. But, it can be argued we're given the equivalent result, of a kind of topic wide de facto ban.
:If the counter is that is not the case, then logic tells us that such specified criteria should been previously and is applied to all languages, {{tq|equally and fairly}}, across all programming related articles and content. An editor who attempted to add "lesser known than the others" languages to what existed, such as Zig or Haxe (it and others are not even on TIOBE), should have been equally scrutinized, reverted, or gotten requests for opinions on them. Not to mention the timeline of when opinions are requested, after already implementing and enforcing abrasive reverts and actions. [[User:Wukuendo|Wukuendo]] ([[User talk:Wukuendo|talk]]) 03:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
::
:::Somehow, "lesser" or "as well known" languages such as Nim, Haxe, Zig, D, Ocaml, Elixir... represent peak "dueness", while it just so happens that specifically V and/or Pony do not? That includes ignoring the factual presentation of data from neutral 3rd parties about V's comparable popularity. Even more, upon the discovery of the presence of Pony and V, {{tq|all other languages}} on those articles were ignored or deemed acceptable enough not to question. This was allowed for years (and continues to be), until the day Pony or V showed up, and only then was just those specifically handled. [[User:Wukuendo|Wukuendo]] ([[User talk:Wukuendo|talk]]) 10:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
::::You
:::::(1) This situation was forced by the abrasive implementation of what can be seen as a de facto ban on specific languages and articles. Arguably, few want any part in tangling with that kind of Wikipedia stress or intimidation, nor are they likely to be as concerned about the handling of various programming languages. As I was specifically the recipient of repeated aggressive actions and invited to discuss over here, so I came. (2) It's {{tq|'''not'''}} a straw man that neutral 3rd party data (TIOBE and GitHub) shows V as [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiably]] {{tq|as popular or as well known}} as languages on the articles in question. (3) The inclusion of notable languages with already existing Wikipedia pages (like Pony), particularly those with significant academic papers and coverage, to give a more diverse spectrum of examples on programming related articles was rarely an issue until being recently made so. [[User:Wukuendo|Wukuendo]] ([[User talk:Wukuendo|talk]]) 05:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
::We always needs more than the mere existence of a Wikipedia page on someone/thing to justify inclusion elsewhere. We don't list an actor on every page about a film or show they appeared in, every genre writer in an article about that genre, or every destination served in a rail station article. Exhaustive, indiscriminate lists are discouraged; we're looking for content that's significant for that article. [[WP:NOTDIRECTORY]] applies, as does the entire spirit of [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] (the enumerations in our policies are not exhaustive either).
::The existence of other content doesn't establish that any such content can be included; [[WP:OTHERCONTENT]] illustrates some such arguments. Often we deal with issues as they arise; that doesn't require fixing all pre-existing issues first. If an article already has too much of something, that's no justification for making it worse.
::The TIOBE ranking of V is not a good argument for V's inclusion in articles about [[Type aliasing]] or [[Hash table]]s; as our [[TIOBE index]] says, it is only {{tq|calculated from the number of search engine results for queries containing the name of the language.}} As such, it's highly susceptible to spamming and SEO; its only virtue is that it must have been very easy to program but gives TIOBE publicity. Worse, "V" is a peculiar challenge to identify and TIOBE mark its result, as having only 80% confidence (which in hypothesis testing would be worthless).[https://web.archive.org/web/20250408203022/https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/programminglanguages_definition/] V's score of only 0.19% renders it almost indistinguishable from languages that didn't make the top-50. Pony doesn't feature.
::Our [[Tiobe index]] article mentions two alternative indices. Neither V or Pony feature in the June 2024 Redmonk rankings[https://redmonk.com/sogrady/2024/09/12/language-rankings-6-24/] or the IEEE Spectrum 2024 rankings.[https://spectrum.ieee.org/top-programming-languages-2024]
::V was first released in 2019. It remains in beta, now at version 0.4.10. According to its creator, "After 0.4 0.6, we'll be going for 1.0 right away, freezing the syntax, similar to what Go did. So if something has to be changed, now is the time to do it." That was in 2020.[https://github.com/vlang/v/discussions/7610] According to our article; V was {{tq|created to develop a desktop messaging client named Volt}}; nothing else is mentioned.
::According to [[Pony (programming language)]], after 10 years that's at 0.59.0.
::Altogether, there's no sign that either V or Pony's choice of a [[decimal separator]] or inclusion of [[algebraic data type]]s, for example, will be significant to our readers or otherwise worth mentioning. It's not Wikipedia's job to include products in fairness to them, and it's unsurprising that adding V to so many articles raised questions. [[User:NebY|NebY]] ([[User talk:NebY|talk]]) 18:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
::Articles in question, to which V and/or Pony were added, include:
::[[Algebraic data type]], [[At sign]], [[Bcrypt]], [[Concurrency (computer science)]], [[Conditional (computer programming)]], [[Decimal separator]], [[Exit (system call)]], [[Filter (higher-order function)]], [[Foreign function interface]], [[Hash table]], [[Increment and decrement operators]], [[Interface (object-oriented programming)]], [[Mixin]], [[Modular programming]], [[NaCl (software)]], [[Printf]], [[Project Verona]], [[Range (computer programming)]], [[Result type]], [[Self-hosting (compilers)]], [[Snake case]], [[Ternary conditional operator]] and [[Type aliasing]]
::They were also added to two list articles which begin with explicit "notable programming languages" criteria, [[List of programming languages]] and [[List of programming languages by type]]
::and two which don't show explicit criteria, [[Generational list of programming languages]] and [[List of computing mascots]], . [[User:NebY|NebY]] ([[User talk:NebY|talk]]) 18:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
:::(1) The claim that either V or Pony are in an excessive number of articles is arguably false.
:::Nim, Zig, Red, D, Ocaml, Haxe, Racket, and Elixir are "lesser known" languages included in such articles.
:::Examples of links to their pages:
:::* Zig's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Zig_(programming_language)&limit=500 link count is at 169]
:::* Nim's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Nim_(programming_language)&limit=500 link count is 267]
:::* Racket's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/racket_(programming_language)&limit=500 link count is 320]
:::* Haxe's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Haxe&limit=500 link count is 461]
:::* Elixir's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Elixir_(programming_language)&limit=500 link count is 473]
:::Racket and Haxe, by the way, are not on TIOBE, Redmonk, or the IEEE lists. Nim is not on the IEEE list. This is pointed out, not as a knock on any of those languages (as don't support the advocated censoring), but rather there is not excessive [[Wikilawyering|wikilawyering]] or what some might call shadow tribunals, erected to force shadow bans on editors for mentioning them in programming related articles. The obsessiveness looks reflective of [[Wikipedia:I_just_don't_like_it|I just don't like it]], to force what can be seen or allowed.
:::(2) One of many examples of what appears to be selective bias or the hypocritical application of de facto banning
:::On the [[Type_aliasing|Type aliasing]] article, same editor added the {{tq|lesser known}} languages of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Type_aliasing&diff=prev&oldid=1161303852 Nim], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Type_aliasing&diff=prev&oldid=1251081551 Zig], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Type_aliasing&diff=prev&oldid=1209365308 Crystal], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Type_aliasing&diff=prev&oldid=1161540772 Elixir]. There was: no multiple reverting of the editor, no hounding of the editor all over Wikipedia, nor any application of additional special criteria for inclusion of these supposedly "lesser" languages.
:::(3) Using old rankings
:::The TIOBE and GitHub rankings are {{tq|'''2025'''}} and current, not years old. They are {{tq|industry recognized, famous, and neutral}}. There are critics of them, but there are also critics of Redmonk and IEEE as well. Furthermore, The programming landscape is not static, and more current monthly ratings are reflective of that. Their usage was to show that one of the languages in question, is arguably and comparatively well-known enough in relationship to others in the articles.
:::(4) "will be significant to our readers or otherwise worth mentioning"
:::The language being used strikes as strange. {{tq|No}} specific editor of Wikipedia can position themselves to declare what readers would find significant or worthwhile to read. That is far too presumptuous.
:::(5) Wikipedia wide diverting of editors
:::The article specific discussions among editors, which arguably should be taking place and were how things were done, looked to be rerouted to here. For what can be argued as a kind of shadow tribunal over if Pony or V are allowed to ever be mentioned. That looks at least inappropriate, if not arguably trying to get a shadow tribunal rubber stamp for [[Wikipedia:Wikibullying|bullying]]. It's confusing as to what is actually trying to be accomplished. "These languages have been found guilty of not being significant enough". "Therefore, no mention of them shall ever be allowed again on Wikipedia".
:::If that is not the case, looks like specifics over inclusion, should be handled at the individual article level. There would be less of the appearance of impropriety directed at a specific language or editor. [[User:Wukuendo|Wukuendo]] ([[User talk:Wukuendo|talk]]) 14:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
::::Please do not accuse fellow editors of hypocrisy, censorship, bullying, obsessiveness, wikilawyering and the rest - see our policy pages [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith]] and [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks]]. Considering our readers is not presumptuous. The most recent rankings of Redmonk and IEEE Spectrum are not years old, and are not old in terms of the lifetimes of V and Pony, first released abou six and ten years ago. We are dealing here with the multiple insertions of two languages still in beta and hardly used, V and Pony (e.g. {{tq|Java, JavaScript, Julia, Swift, <u>V (Vlang)[41], </u>and free-form Fortran 90 use the underscore (_) character for this purpose.}}[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Decimal_separator&diff=prev&oldid=1291974774]), not pre-existing problems in some articles. [[User:NebY|NebY]] ([[User talk:NebY|talk]]) 09:50, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
:::::(1) "our readers"
:::::They are not your or mine readers. Wikipedia articles are for the public. All editors of them are equal and should receive equal treatment. Discriminatory practices against editors, based on bias or hypocrisy, is not consistent with any stated policy.
:::::(2) Observation of article state, exclusion practices, or use of analogy
:::::To {{tq|show}} there is a de facto ban being executed, {{tq|unequal application}} of special criteria created to exclude certain languages, or pointing out the {{tq|hypocrisy}} in justifications for such de facto bans are allowed descriptions of behavior and the factual state of the articles in question.
:::::Factual {{tq|evidence}} is then presented to back up those assertions and analogies are used to illustrate the logic of what is being done. It would be no different than saying, "X is being blocked by Y". That is either the case or not, the statement in itself or analogies of it, is not accusatory. Facts do exist. Analogies can be used to illustrate points.
:::::(3) Presenting old rankings and ignoring or excluding newer and famous industry standard rankings
:::::TIOBE is the {{tq|'''most''' famous industry recognized rankings}} for programming languages. More so than Redmonk or IEEE. Redmonk's StackOverflow usage is very {{tq|problematic}}. StackOverflow is a {{tq|forum}}, with anonymous accounts, which is often characterized as [https://www.techzine.eu/news/devops/127669/stack-overflow-is-dying-is-it-being-replaced-by-ai/ dying] and known for creating a [https://analyticsindiamag.com/ai-features/is-stack-overflow-dying/ toxic atmosphere]. Many programmers seldom to never use their forum, instead going to language specific sites or using AI (also why year matters). Additionally, certain languages are more difficult to understand, so generate more questions. By comparison, GitHub's place is without doubt, as is: {{tq|famous, industry recognized, validated data, and neutral}}.
:::::Not only are the Redmonk and IEEE presenting {{tq|out of date and old data}}, but the {{tq|hypocrisy}} is made readily apparent, where numerous languages included in those articles are {{tq|'''not'''}} on the Redmonk, IEEE, or even TIOBE.
:::::Even beyond that point, of languages in those articles not being in top programming rankings, it has been demonstrated that the assertion of Pony or V are excessively listed is false as well. For example, the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Hack_(programming_language)&limit=500 Hack] programming language is neither on the old Redmonk and IEEE, nor TIOBE. It is linked to on Wikipedia {{tq|'''305'''}} times.
:::::(4) Hardly used in comparison to other languages listed
:::::The assertion that V, is hardly used in comparison to other languages listed (Hack, Haxe, Red, Racket, Nim...) in those articles, is {{tq|demonstrably}} false. This is what {{tq|'''both'''}} TIOBE and GitHub lists show. The GitHub data, {{tq|extends back to 2011}}, shows V as a top 11 to 10 repo for the {{tq|last 5 years}} (year to year rankings). Being ranked above languages included in those pages, such as Elixir, Crystal, Nim, Ruby, Haxe, Racket, etc...
:::::(5) Knowledge of programming languages and characterizing normal editing as if vandalism or nefarious
:::::To add programming languages and references to them, in context to the subject, is the normal editing process. This can be clearly seen in all articles in question and should not be categorized or presented like it's vandalism.
:::::Furthermore, various languages in those articles are also in beta. For example Zig (in beta), which is linked (see above) in far more articles (link count continues to increase), and without conflict or insinuating anything nefarious.[[User:Wukuendo|Wukuendo]] ([[User talk:Wukuendo|talk]]) 03:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
== request for help on Untether AI article ==
Hello,
One of the reviewers of a draft article about Untether AI that I have published (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Untether_AI) suggested I post a request for help here. Would anyone have some suggestions as to how to improve the article, particularly its notability? Any feedback would be very much appreciated. [[User:Rhg2|Rhg2]] ([[User talk:Rhg2|talk]]) 16:05, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
:Notability is an issue that cannot necessarily be resolved by making the draft better. Establishing notability requires finding good sources. For some subjects, such sources simply don't exist and an article on such a subject cannot be written until others publish [[WP:SECONDARY]] information about the subject. Since the company you're writing about is defunct, it is less likely new sources will ever be published. Furthermore, establishing notability can be an especially difficult problem for companies as [[WP:NCORP|notability requirements for companies]] are particularly demanding. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 14:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
==MLPerf benchmarks==
Hello again,
Would this also be a good place to suggest an article on the MLPerf benchmarks ( https://mlcommons.org/benchmarks )? I don't think I'm familiar enough to write it myself, but I'd be happy to help. [[Special:Contributions/2607:F2C0:B199:F700:4D70:201C:3E15:980E|2607:F2C0:B199:F700:4D70:201C:3E15:980E]] ([[User talk:2607:F2C0:B199:F700:4D70:201C:3E15:980E|talk]]) 10:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
== [[Legacy mode]] ==
This stub needs more than 1 iffy source. Please add reliable sources. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 23:35, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
== [[Alert correlation]] ==
This has been unsourced for 13 years. Please add reliable sources. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 19:51, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
== Good article reassessment for [[Moore's law]] ==
[[Moore's law]] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the [[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Moore's law/1|reassessment page]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 21:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
== [[Allocation group]] ==
== Requested move at [[Talk:GeForce GTX 10 series#Requested move 13 July 2025]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:GeForce GTX 10 series#Requested move 13 July 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup> 10:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
== Merge proposal at [[Talk:Computer-supported cooperative work]] ==
There is currently [[Talk:Computer-supported cooperative work#Proposed merge of Computer-supported collaboration into Computer-supported cooperative work|a proposal]] to merge [[Computer-supported collaboration]] into [[Computer-supported cooperative work]] that has been open since January, and it could use some feedback. [[User:Thebiguglyalien|<span style="color:#487d30">Thebiguglyalien</span>]] ([[User talk:Thebiguglyalien|<span style="color:#714e2a">talk</span>]]) [[Special:Contributions/Thebiguglyalien|🛸]] 07:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
== [[Characteristic based product configurator]] ==
Please explain this in layperson's terms and add reliable sources. Thank you in advance. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 16:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
==
All these tags combined means that this needs major fixes, or deletion. Please discuss. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 18:23, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
== Requested move at [[Talk:Robert Adamson (software pioneer)#Requested move 8 August 2025]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Robert Adamson (software pioneer)#Requested move 8 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:Векочел|Векочел]] ([[User talk:Векочел|talk]]) 09:15, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
== Requested move at [[Talk:MPEG-1 Audio Layer II#Requested move 3 August 2025]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:MPEG-1 Audio Layer II#Requested move 3 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup> 11:25, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
== [[
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Information.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>'''[[:Floppy disk]]''', which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RfC for determining [[WP:SCOPE|the scope]] of the article. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the '''[[Talk:Floppy_disk#RFC:_What_should_the_scope_of_the_floppy_disk_article_be?|discussion page]]'''.<!-- Template:Rfc notice--> Thank you. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 19:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
== Merge proposal at [[Talk:Small Form-factor Pluggable]] ==
There is currently [[Talk:Small Form-factor Pluggable#Merge from Small Form Factor Committee|a proposal]] to merge [[Small Form Factor Committee]] into [[Small Form-factor Pluggable]] that has seemingly stalled, and it could use some feedback.[[User:onel5969|'''<span style="color:#536895;">Onel</span><span style="color:#ffb300;">5969</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup> 13:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
== Requested move at [[Talk:Flat Display Mounting Interface#Requested move 8 August 2025]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Flat Display Mounting Interface#Requested move 8 August 2025]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup> 10:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
==Requested move at [[:Talk:Rectifier (neural networks)#Requested move 23 August 2025|Talk:Rectifier (neural networks) § Requested move 23 August 2025]]==
[[File:Information.svg|40px|left]]An editor has requested that [[:Rectifier (neural networks)]] be moved to [[:Rectified linear unit]], which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You  are invited to participate in [[Talk:Rectifier (neural networks)#Requested_move_23_August_2025|the move discussion]]. [[Special:Contributions/174.138.218.72|174.138.218.72]] ([[User talk:174.138.218.72|talk]]) 15:02, 24 August 2025 (UTC)<!-- [[Template:RM notice]] -->
| |||