Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:47, 27 January 2006

Talk:Multiple inheritance

I restored the content because I felt it was useful to have that record in there. Deleting the talk page would have served no purpose at all. Regards, howcheng {chat} 19:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition

Do you really think this article needs to be merged with Java Platform? I'm not sure I see your reasoning. There's the Java platform, which is composed of J2SE, J2EE, and J2ME. Each is sufficiently large that it merits its own main article. Am I missing something? - ElAmericano | talk 19:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

RFC (standards)

Re: this edit, Where is the magic documented by which RFC 3066 becomes a link? And doesn't this result in overlinking if the RFC needs to be mentioned multiple times in an article? - Jmabel | Talk 00:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where it is documented. I suspect it may be new? I was going to create a template to perform linking to RFCs when I noticed that the Wiki software was adding the links (similar, I think to how it handles ISBN numbers). And yes, it could result in overlinking. I suppose the inelegant RFC 3066 could be used instead to prevent linking after the first reference. – Doug Bell 00:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

TNX - Jmabel | Talk 00:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:Context

The edit is done. I didn't see it because I was looking only in the section that was tagged with {{editprotected}}. Regards, howcheng {chat} 07:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Question about deleting NanoCAD page

I see page about the NanoCAD program is currently under consideration for deletion. I'm curious about why that is. Is it considered a vanity page? Or is it that NanoCAD has such low visibility these days? (It enjoyed some popularity in the late 90s, and maybe I should be content with that.)

If I were to write something about the current Nanorex product, which is in a similar vein, would that also be considered for deletion? I expect it will become much better-known than NanoCAD ever was, and I'm proud of my involvement in its development.

-- WillWare 18:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

To quote from the (short) article:

NanoCAD is a Java applet (formerly a Scheme program) that was intended to eventually evolve into a useful computer-aided design system for nanotechnology.

That sounds to me like it never became a finished work, nor was notable. If this is wrong, the article would need to be expanded. You can place you comments on the delete page and explain why it shouldn't be deleted. This would most likely need to be accompanied by expanding the article. – Doug Bell 19:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Ward Churchill and WP:NPOV

Please do take care to review this Misplaced Pages policy. I'm not sure if the Churchill article is the first one with political/contentious content you've worked on, but I see most of your history is in technical programming areas (writing about computer programs is what I do for a living too, though not necessarily on WP). On political topics (and Churchill has been a particular draw for POV-mongers and vandals), you need to take a special care about not attributing motives, slanting characterizations to promote a specific POV, and so on. A lot of that is less of a danger when writing about, e.g. Java programming.

Btw. You'll probably notice that I nominated Doug Bell for deletion. It's true that I stumbled on the article via your edits, but I do not mean this nomination with any malice, or in any direct relation to your edit history. As I say in the nomination, I think it's a borderline notability. Certainly if you have written any other books or articles that have been widely read, that pushes the article to "keep" (improving an article during AfD nomination is perfectly fine, and may clarify the reasons for "keep"); but second authorship on one technical book is below the threshold to my mind. Other AfD voters may feel differently though. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 20:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)