User talk:Elwoz/Archive 2016 09 07
Wow. Talk about bold edits. I like it! I don't know whether it will end the edit war or touch off renewed battle, but just at the moment it's a much better, clearer article. Thanks! Karen 00:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for the kind words. I'm still sort of boggled at having had the guts to dive into a live edit war, but if it sticks, it'll have been worth it... Zack
File:Buttons-too-low.png missing description details
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 05:05, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- That image was uploaded in order to leave feedback on a Wikipedia reskin that was in beta at the time. It is no longer useful and y'all should go ahead and delete it. Zack (talk) 16:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Your account will be renamed
03:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
There are several problems with your rewrite of Spooling. My first thought was to revert the edit, but it might be better if you could fix it up. The problems that I noticed were
- Spooling does not mediate between the computer and the peripherals. SPOOL is an application that runs on the computer, in parallel with other work.
- Media copies on a 1401 were not spooling, they were an alternative to spooling.
- Spooling is not just buffering of job output, it is buffering of job input, typically card-to-tape or card-to-disk copying in parallel with execution of earlier jobs.
- The term "Simultaneous Peripheral Operation On Line" in the IBM program "SPOOL System, 7070-IO-076" goes back to the 1950's. Given that the common term at the time was reel rather than spool, a backronym seems unlikely.
- Thanks for your feedback. Responding in order:
- The first sentence of the article does not need to be specific about exactly where the spooler process runs, and I think "mediating between a computer and a slow peripheral" is an accurate description of what spooling does, even if the mediation happens to be done by the computer itself.
- I don't have personal experience with, or references for, 1401-era computing; what I wrote is my best guess at a sensible interpretation of the corresponding paragraphs of the old article, which were not terribly clear. I would welcome targeted improvements to that section by people who remember those days and/or can provide references. Having said that, it seems to me you are insisting on a very narrow interpretation of the meaning of the phrase---too narrow for a general audience.
- Yes, spooling can be applied to either input or output; however, I think it's important to put the discussion of print spooling (the most common modern application) first, and that is a form of output. Some forms of input spooling appear in the "other applications" section; if you'd like to flesh them out and/or add more that would be fine by me.
- In the absence of hard evidence, I think the discussion of the origin of the term is sufficiently hedged both ways as is.
- Perhaps this conversation should continue on the talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Two-stroke engine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clean Air Act. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Transformer oil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Volatility. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.