Hnobley
Just a tech dude
Thank you for all your input to PC Power Management. Good stuff.
Fionacampbelly (talk) 12:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. In answer to your question (see revision history of article): I undid your edit instead of fixing the link as I am not familiar with the topic. I only came across the article when I was browsing the BBC website, and thought it might be of use for you. Sorry for any inconvenience I caused.Beeshoney (talk) 14:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
No problem. Thank you for your contibution Hnobley (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Following your request on my talk page I have userfied Verismic at User:Hnobley/Verismic to give you a chance to improve it. Sorry I didn't do this sooner, but I got distracted by answering your other points, and forgot this. I wish you the best in doing so, and I hope you will have an improved version of it ready to return as an article soon. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Wake-on-LAN edit
References removed:
http://www.liebsoft.com/pdfs/Wake_On_LAN.pdf - the reference is obviously hidden advertise of a commerical software "Lieberman Software" that is referenced as a "trustful" source.
http://www.acronymfinder.com/Advanced-Manageability-Alliance-%28Intel-%26-IBM%29-%28AMA%29.html - this is absolutely useless reference, just follow it. Two other ref's in the articles has the same definition as long as other sensible content.
http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=135178 - does it looks to be trustful reference? Anyone who want to know pinout of WoL can google for "wake on lan pinout" for any necessary information, do not clog the article on Wikipedia with thash info links.
http://www.simtec.co.uk/products/EB7500ATX/files/EB7500ATX_TRM.pdf - specific motherboard description that has not related to the general article content on Wikipedia at all.
http://www.national.com/assets/en/boards/dp83816_lqfp_demo_bom.pdf - the same comment, do you suggest anybody understand what it is here at all?
http://www.newark.com/te-connectivity-amp/173979-3/wire-board-connector-header-3pos/dp/24C9058 - it is internet shop link, what it is for?
http://www.webcitation.org/5tAlsJ27N - why need the citation while exist original link to http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3774 ? Maybe do you suggest to do all wikipedia references via google cache at all?
Gigabyte 8KNXP motherboard - the same very specific model that does not references to the main article subject.
Some other article improvements has been made.
So, look carefully for the changes I made and restore the edit if you have no more objections for it. 93.95.152.98 (talk) 06:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Before I restored the edit I had a look through the type of changes that had been made. As far as I could tell in most cases there were links to reasonable external content. This is generally good if it provides background to the article and doesn't exist primarily for non encyclopedic reasons. For instance the Lieberman Software document is just about WoL. It isn't overtly pushing a particular product but is clearly written by a commercial writer who knows what he is talking about. If we remove all reference to anything created by a commercial entity Wikipedia will be a much poorer place. Unless it its blatant commercial spam I think users themselves can make a judgement. In this case I don't detect an commercial interest.
I tend to agree with you about the Acronymfinder link. I wouldn't object if this was removed.
I take your point about the pin out documents. They're not appropriate.
The thing that made me intervene was that there was clearly a non-constructive edit war going on. If you wanted to clean-up the article by removing this superfluous stuff I don't think anyone would mind. However, please realise your likely to get editors annoyed if you just blanket undo other editors changes without trying to build/improve upon them. Hnobley (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Not agreed:
"For instance the Lieberman Software document is just about WoL." -
It is just about WoL usage with third-party software such as Lieberman, i.e. it is obvious hidden advertising. What for introducing info on WoL in the doc - there is many other sources on the Internet that have similiar information including Wiki page itself and other references here (for example AMD's white paper, it is more trustworthy source than unknown lieberman software source, it isn't?). Furthermore it has two duplicating link in the article.
Wikipedia is not for commerce, if anyone need a software - him can google for it, there is no necessity for such product placement via Wikipedia.
"However, please realise your likely to get editors annoyed if you just blanket undo other editors changes without trying to build/improve upon them." -
Sometime removing is also improving in order to avoid trash in an article.93.95.152.98 (talk) 03:17, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
What for another edits:
[ [ computer network ] ] ing -> [ [ computer networking ] ]
Is it the first good looking type of wiki link? On the second there is a correct reference.
"1998-04-15 IBM Announces Universal Management -- Industry's Most Comprehensive Tools to Lower Total Cost of Ownership , Alliance with Intel Enhances PC Manageability] - United States, Press room IBM" -> "IBM Announces Universal Management in Alliance with Intel Enhances PC Managebility"
Removed redundant information, all necessary information is available via link.
"The following terms are trademarks of IBM Corporation in the United States, other countries, or both: ...Wake on LAN..], Important notices, IBM" -> "IBM Announces Universal Management in Alliance with Intel Enhances PC Managebility"
The Same comment as above.
"Wireshark website" -> "Wireshark wiki"
Obvious edit.
"WoL with 802.1x" -> "Understanding 802.1X Authentication with Wake-on-LAN, Cisco Catalyst 6500 Release 12.2SX Software Configuration Guide"
Explanation for the reference.
http://www.national.com/assets/en/boards/dp83816_lqfp_demo_bom.pdf http://www.newark.com/te-connectivity-amp/173979-3/wire-board-connector-header-3pos/dp/24C9058
Again, it is very technical info and internet shop link, absolutely useless information in the body of the article. Read again my thoughts above.
"webcitation.org" usage
Again, read carefully my thoughts above.
"particular example, the Gigabyte 8KNXP motherboard ..."
Have you noticed "original research?" tag since 2009 without any change? There again some strange info in the article. Don't you suggest to add examples for all types and trademarks of motherboards here? 93.95.152.98 (talk) 03:35, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
I have paraphrased some of the content you added to the above article, as it appears to have been copied from ttp://www.datasynergy.co.uk/products/misc/atatool.aspx, a copyright web page. All content you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)