Misplaced Pages

Talk:ITIL: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:26, 25 October 2012 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,318 editsm Signing comment by Djwaustin-wiki - "→Missing article for Strategy Management topic: new section"← Previous edit Latest revision as of 09:33, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,078 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] 
(40 intermediate revisions by 31 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|search=yes}} {{Talk header|search=yes}}
⚫ {{British English}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Computing|class=c|importance=high}} {{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
{{WikiProject Technology|class=b}} {{WikiProject Business|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Systems |class=start|importance=mid |field=systems engineering}} {{WikiProject Computing|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Systems|field=systems engineering|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Technology}}
}} }}
⚫ {{Merged-from|ITIL v3}}
⚫ {{British English}}

⚫ {{mergedfrom|ITIL v3}}
{{autoarchivingnotice|bot=MiszaBot|age=100}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}
Line 15: Line 14:
|minthreadsleft = 4 |minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(100d) |algo = old(100d)
|archive = Talk:Information Technology Infrastructure Library/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:ITIL/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}


== Reference to Lean-IT ? ==

A reference to the Lean-IT concept is surprisingly missing in this article ! I did not know about "Lean-ITIL", by the way.
Anyway, if someone competent thinks this should appear somewhere in there, here is the link : http://en.wikipedia.org/Lean_IT <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 07:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Criticisms are Criticisms (comments by ], moved to talkpage by ]) ==

Criticisms...and meant to stimulate areas of thought and research!! Prove that they are wrong 1st before deleting - Raynor This should not be considered an advertisment like most delusional "defenders of the faith" like to imagine. "Sniping" would be a calculated and considered attack but does not diminish the fact of truths, but may seem threatening to those over zealous fans with either; little actual knowledge or experience in the subject matter or perhaps, ''only'' knowledge in that subject matter.
<br>

No,the person making the claim has the burden of proof. Many of these criticisms are flatly wrong. For example, the ITIL books are available online through The Cabinet Office. None of these criticisms particularly stimulate thought or research.] (]) 20:02, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The availability of the official OGC books (of which I have stacks) and the cost (which is less than university fare), is held up as a criticism of the ITIL. This is neither true nor a valued, intelligent criticism entry for this subject. It does not offer critical insights to the pros and cons of ITIL.
<br>
"Accusations that...." that entry might be considered "sniping" since it sounds like a hotly contested issue about to be deliberated upon - where as it is merely inflammatory semantics and lexicology, but did not suffer arbitrary deletions in wikiadvertise
<br>
And as originally pointed out...Additionally:
<br>
1) Anyone can institute ITIL and create service levels so low that the claim for successful implementation can be made. - absolutely True and the way it is currently being implemented in many sectors.
<br>
2) The flexibilities required to intelligently deploy are beyond the hosts of average left hand brain constrained business executives. - Most execs are very inflexible and hold up names of things as a method of not providing CSI and doubtful if they might even identify the interdependencies and linkages.
<br>
3) The language used in all the manuals meanders from overly obvious generalities to ambiguous inflations without clear validations. - True look yourself
<br>
4) Senior executives can arbitrarily decide to subjugate ITIL to their personal preferences without analysis or proofs. - True and the general way it is most often implemented.
:I moved these comments to the talkpage because there are some problems that may need to be resolved before they can appear in article space.
:Complaining about other wikipedians disagreeing with you is not the kind of thing that the public should be reading; least of all arguments that any wikipedian who disagrees with your unsourced criticism must be ignorant.
:If there's a good basis for these criticisms of ITIL, I'd love to see them implemented in the article. But first, there may need to be some structural change.
:"''somebody can do a half-arsed implementation of X, thus undermining the intent of X''" is a criticism of practically any IT standard. Similarly, criticism of execs reflects a problem with execs rather than a problem with a specific family of technology standards.
⚫ :] (]) 16:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Removed this quote as it is inaccurate (it may have been accurate in 2002 but not now)
As Jan van Bon (author and editor of many IT Service Management publications) notes,
:''There is confusion about ITIL, stemming from misunderstandings about its nature. ITIL is, as the OGC states, a set of best practices. The OGC doesn't claim that ITIL's best practices describe pure processes. The OGC also doesn't claim that ITIL is a framework, designed as one coherent model. That is what most of its users make of it, probably because they have such a great need for such a model...''<ref>{{cite book|author=van Bon, J.(Editor)|title=The guide to IT service management|publisher=Addison Wesley|year=2002|isbn=0201737922}}</ref>

Because - OGC *DO* claim that ITIL is a framework. The ITILv3 Official Introduction says "After twenty years ITIL remains the most recognized framework for ITSM in the world. While it has evolved and changed its breadth and depth, it preserves the fundamental concepts of leading practice." There are many many places in the OGC docs where they refer to ITIL as a framework and a cohetent model. ] (]) 06:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

== Clarity of Text ==

I may be out of my depth here, but
"Features include:

* single point of contact (SPOC) and not necessarily the first point of contact (FPOC)
"

If there is a single point of contact then surely there is also a first point of contact (only one in fact). If I've misunderstood, which I suspect I have, then the text isn't clear enough. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


While ITIL was started in the it has since become an international standard adopted everywhere. Should the article be re-written to remove British English? I'm not sure of the arguments pro or con in this area. --] (]) 17:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Impact of policies and procedures for technical supports (impact on cost, user experience, escalation process, tired support. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:No. Why would any other variety of English be more suitable? --] (]) 17:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
⚫ :No; see ] --] (]) 15:53, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
::Most of the British English has been removed from the ITIL guidance already. The exams have had all of the language specific to the UK removed for some time now. The reason is very simple, and has already been stated -- it is used around the world. Keeping British colloquialisms and UK-specific spellings of words like "whilst" makes no sense.] (]) 12:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
::: If you're going to remove 'British English', why not remove French or German whilst you are about it? It makes no sense, as you say, if you can write everything in American. ] (]) 10:59, 23 June 2020 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
== Merge sections "Frameworks mapping to ITIL" and "Variants of ITIL" ==


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I believe that these sections contain overlapping and redundant information.


I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
I'm new to editing wikipedia. But I'd be happy to try to re-word these two sections into prose which both lists and discusses:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110912184827/http://www.apmg-international.com/ITILSCRquery.asp to http://www.apmg-international.com/ITILSCRquery.asp
COBIT, MOF, BECTA's FITS, IBM's ITUP and eTom.


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
But that seems to be a major change and I don't feel comfortable just diving in without warning ... I guess I'm not really looking for approval so much as checking to see if there's any objection from anyone watching this.
⚫ ] (]) 22:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
:I'd agree that there's some redundancy. Looks like a good idea.
:Go ahead and try making some improvements. If you need a hand with anything, just ask here (or try the ]). I look forward to your contributions. The worst that can happen is that somebody disagrees with you, in which case we can come back here to discuss the best way forward for the article; we won't bite! ] (]) 00:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
::If you're doing a lot of rearranging, it can be helpful to use the "''Show preview''" button every so often, to get a feel for what the page will actually look like once you submit. It's important for content to be ''sourced'', so where practical, try to cite a source for things that are non-obvious or potentially controversial. (As a minimum, if you want to cite some other webpage, just put the URL in square brackets and somebody will come along and tidy that up afterwards). ] (]) 00:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
Thanks for that - I'll see what I can do (btw fecnde is me - changed user to my real name instead of nick). Thanks for the quick feedback. ] (]) 07:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 12:44, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
ok ... that's done(ish). I'm not totally happy with some bits of that section (now merged just one) but I think that's cleaner. It feels wrong editing the live page. Is it possible to save something as a draft somewhere? ] (]) 08:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
:I took the liberty of putting a copy of the text in your userpace, at ], where you can play around with a "draft" as much as you like; when you're happy that you've perfected it, you can bring it back to live. That page won't show up in Google searches &c. Hope that helps? Have fun! ] (]) 10:02, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


⚫ == External Link to Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM) ==
Hey thanks! That is exactly what I was after. It felt really wrong editing the live version. When I'm done, do I just copy/paste the code or is there a merge feature? I guess I should rtfm :) ] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 17:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


I have observed that Misplaced Pages doesn't have an article on Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM), listed under Service Strategy Heading.<br>
:Next to the preview button is a "''show changes''" button which presents a diff of the current article and your proposed changes. Apart from that, it's just copy and paste. Merging page histories must be performed by an administrator, you can request it by placing <tt>{{tlx|histmerge|''page to merge histories with''}}</tt> in the article. ] 09:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
I have a good article on this topic: Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM)<br>
::If all the changes to the userified text have been done by a single person, and any changed sections would be just pasted into the existing article not unlike a normal edit, and would all be attributed to the same person, do we really need merged histories?
As my website is new I'm not putting the link directly in the main article. I'd request other editors to create/improve this Misplaced Pages article with help of the article link given below:<br>
::Davebremer: the draft in your userspace is not a ''complete'' replica, because "live" articles have things like categories at the bottom which could be problematic if they appeared on a duplicate article in userspace, so I omitted those. Don't just overwrite the whole article, instead it would be better to replace the bits that you've improved. Other people might have worked on any part of the live article in the meantime, so be careful of that; MER-C's suggestion is helpful. ] (]) 10:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
<br>
If you found the above article helpful, then please put the link in the main article as external link.--] (]) 10:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)


== ITIL v4: it seems to be "change enablement" rather than "change control" ==
== Avoid Restatement ==


The article speaks about the "change control" practice in ITIL v4 and states that this name has changed compared to previous versions.
The article should not include a re-statement of what ITIL is, contains, addresses, etc. The sources referenced will do this -- or the article won't stay. As an article, it ought to be an overview of what the framework provides but not by specific applications. There needs to be enough detail so that similarities and differences from other frameworks can be shown.
] (]) 22:57, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


The ITIL Foundation Guide (Limited, AXELOS. ITIL Foundation: ITIL 4 Edition . The Stationery Office Ltd. Kindle Edition.) speaks about "change enablement" rather than "change control".
⚫ == Missing article for Strategy Management topic ==


This may have changed during the development of v4. I'm not closely involved with the ITIL standard, so I didn't just want to make the change in the text without being sure of what really is the definitive term.
Under ITIL Service Strategy is a broken link for ... "Strategy Management". I fixed a link for ... "Financial management for IT services", as it was just a typo, but cannot find an article for this topic. I could just make a stub, but that would be a waste, if the real one is floating around somewhere. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:24, 25 October 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
⚫ ] (]) 13:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 09:33, 10 July 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ITIL article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBusiness Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconComputing Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSystems Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Systems engineering.
WikiProject iconTechnology
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology
The contents of the ITIL v3 page were merged into ITIL. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.


While ITIL was started in the it has since become an international standard adopted everywhere. Should the article be re-written to remove British English? I'm not sure of the arguments pro or con in this area. --Jasenlee (talk) 17:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

No. Why would any other variety of English be more suitable? --Michig (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
No; see MOS:RETAIN --hulmem (talk) 15:53, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Most of the British English has been removed from the ITIL guidance already. The exams have had all of the language specific to the UK removed for some time now. The reason is very simple, and has already been stated -- it is used around the world. Keeping British colloquialisms and UK-specific spellings of words like "whilst" makes no sense.Flybd5 (talk) 12:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
If you're going to remove 'British English', why not remove French or German whilst you are about it? It makes no sense, as you say, if you can write everything in American. Fustbariclation (talk) 10:59, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ITIL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:44, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

External Link to Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM)

I have observed that Misplaced Pages doesn't have an article on Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM), listed under Service Strategy Heading.
I have a good article on this topic: Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM)
As my website is new I'm not putting the link directly in the main article. I'd request other editors to create/improve this Misplaced Pages article with help of the article link given below:
Strategy Management for IT Services (ITSM)
If you found the above article helpful, then please put the link in the main article as external link.--AyanBrahmachary (talk) 10:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

ITIL v4: it seems to be "change enablement" rather than "change control"

The article speaks about the "change control" practice in ITIL v4 and states that this name has changed compared to previous versions.

The ITIL Foundation Guide (Limited, AXELOS. ITIL Foundation: ITIL 4 Edition . The Stationery Office Ltd. Kindle Edition.) speaks about "change enablement" rather than "change control".

This may have changed during the development of v4. I'm not closely involved with the ITIL standard, so I didn't just want to make the change in the text without being sure of what really is the definitive term. Ob71 (talk) 13:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Categories: