Wikipedia wants to close an article #629
Comments
|
i think the best thing to do would be to change the page URL to Comsos_X_Sharp or X_Sharp(Cosmos) from X_Sharp or some thing like that |
|
In some sense they are right from their point of view (an Encyclopedia) if the only source are us and no one else talks of it for them X# does not exist! I've answered but it seems there is no possibility of "defense" you are accused of "Canvassing" what is this? |
|
Well, "no one else talks about it" is not an argument when it comes to Wikipedia. There are hundreds of villages in Siberia that have a Wikipedia mention and yet nobody knows about them. To sum up the discussion up to this point - the guy doesn't consider the source code to be "a reliable source discussing the topic in detail" and objects to dragging the developers into this, who are, in the end, the people who could "testify" that those sources are "reliable". Daamn, how much I hate Wikipedia. |
|
If I translate the page to french it will do something? |
|
That would give 'em two pages to delete. |
|
Mh :/ |
|
Searching on Amazon information of a niche open source language does not makes sense for me! Oh well in any case the wiki page is in our sources so at least we don't lose anything we should repropose it when we have our own site: @valentinbreiz you will be accused of "Canvassing" as myself :-) |
|
That wikipedia guy is good, I must admit. Okay then. I am thinking - what if we went to OSDev wiki and started our own category there? There are already several pages about COSMOS... |
|
Good idea I think @lexected |
|
Yes if you have time please do it, sadly OsDev has not the exposure of Wikipedia but what we can do? I think OsDev uses Wiki format so you can simply do cut & paste from Wikipedia. |
|
Ok, a quick copy & paste to perserve the contents: We'll, however, need to polish it a bit more and define the COSMOS category. Anyone up to help me with the task a bit? |
|
Well nothing to do Wiki makes no sense anymore: deleted from OsDev too! We are in good company by the way: it seems some weird "policy" they have now to delete open source article "at random"! |
|
I am close to giving this up... The one article we need to have published somewhere. Like are there any points or promotions for deleting enough articles? |
|
Oh well the article in in our sources: https://github.com/CosmosOS/Cosmos/blob/master/source/XSharp.Compiler/Docs/XSharp.htm we re-publish it when our own web site will be ready. |
|
On 4/30/2017 5:28 PM, lexected wrote:
I am close to giving this up... The one article we need to have
published somewhere.
Just put it on our GITHUB Wiki for now. Maybe later we can use that as
the reference for the others and someone can write a CodeProject
article (I can later, after we get to 17/core)
|
|
hate to inform ya that even the OSDEV wiki page for X# has been deleted :/ I've made an account so I can restore it and tell any 'moderators' the issue with it on Wikipedia. the reason for deletion on OSDEV was 'copied from wikipedia for no reason', but if they don't let us keep either, we can always put it as a section on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos_(operating_system) fingers crossed eh |
|
Just saw this on the OSDev wiki, Copied from Wikipedia for no reason Actively objecting the deletion, please read the discussion here --Lexected 16:27, 30 April 2017 (CDT) some people's attitudes are the worst, and I can't stand people sometimes. however, is X# limited to use with Cosmos? like is it used in anything else? I'm not saying they're right with what they're saying but if it is only for use with Cosmos, maybe it'd be better to have it as a section of a main Cosmos article instead of promoting it to it's own. |
|
It could be used without Cosmos, although its not currently used
anywhere else.
…On 5/1/2017 12:25 PM, Arawn Davies wrote:
Just saw this on the OSDev wiki,
Copied from Wikipedia for no reason
Actively objecting the deletion, please read the discussion here
--Lexected 16:27, 30 April 2017 (CDT)
Actively objecting the objection. It seems that the only reason you want
to provide details for an internal tool (used by COSMOS and nobody else)
is publicity. In other words, I don't see how this is not spam. Brendan
16:49, 30 April 2017 (CDT)
It's not related to OS development. Furthermore, what is the point of
mirroring a Wikipedia article here? It's already there and all our
version will achieve will be to quickly go out of sync with the
original. EDIT: Oh, even Wikipedia doesn't want it so this is clearly
PR. --Love4boobies 19:00, 30 April 2017 (CDT)
some people's attitudes are the worst, and I can't stand people
sometimes. however, is X# limited to use with Cosmos? like is it used in
anything else? I'm not saying they're right with what they're saying but
if it is only for use with Cosmos, maybe it'd be better to have it as a
section of a main Cosmos article instead of promoting it to it's own.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#629 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAbEXEP9WpQloMe53hwXlHt0cZqbg9Nsks5r1geKgaJpZM4NMLDY>.
|
|
IMHO we should find a way to make it usable in other projects probably it will be more "interesting" when we remove our dependency from NASM and generate machine code directly. |
|
On 5/1/2017 12:43 PM, fanoI wrote:
IMHO we should find a way to make it usable in other projects probably
it will be more "interesting" when we remove our dependency from NASM
and generate machine code directly.
At that point It could have its separate Github repository as the "High
Level Assembler" of the future :-)
Even if we rely on NASM thats not an issue. The issue is making it
easily usable externally and then documenting it a bit.
|
|
I almost forgot how cheeky the OSDev moderators can be. I have never thought I would be classified as a PR person :P As @fanol said, we could separate X#. @czhower, IIRC, you are the one who wrote the majority, if not all of the X# compiler code. Would it be difficult to turn it into a stand-alone thing? |
|
It would not be that difficult to separate out. I want to rework the
compiler a bit at some point, but right now everything is on hold for
17/core. There are only 3 issues left to get us to 17/core and they
don't appear to be large issues.
…On 5/1/2017 3:21 PM, lexected wrote:
I almost forgot how cheeky the OSDev moderators can be. I have never
thought I would be classified as a PR person :P
As @fanol <https://github.com/fanol> said, we could separate X#.
@czhower <https://github.com/czhower>, IIRC, you are the one who wrote
the majority, if not all of the X# compiler code. Would it be difficult
to turn it into a stand-alone thing?
If it weren't too sophisticated, I could do it. Probably write some
docs, or even an article, if you're too busy.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#629 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAbEXExOYXVbElJXXcL8rB7D9b7ZFxUjks5r1jCcgaJpZM4NMLDY>.
|
|
If you pointed me to them, I could attempt to make a contribution. |
|
I've passed your offer along to fanol and Charles who are leading that
effort. If you don't hear back from them shortly please let me know.
The current issues are:
1) Install.bat does not work
2) To have working User Kernel we need nuget packages as GAC does not
exist anymore in Net Core
3) Debug does not launch the VM!
…On 5/1/2017 3:33 PM, lexected wrote:
If you pointed me to them, I could attempt to make a contribution.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#629 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAbEXDKAiWiSjFjoL5uuIQ5XXhrDL7N5ks5r1jN3gaJpZM4NMLDY>.
|
|
Hi, I haven't heard from them yet. |
|
@lexected I think 1 and 3 are working now... better to coordinate with @charlesbetros for how to do 2... |
|
RIP X# Article |
|
Yes I'd that at this point we can close this too. |
Hi guys,
people from Wikipedia obviously think that X# is not a thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Sharp
They nominated the article for deletion yesterday. I believe that the article, albeit brief, provides relevant information regarding the general outlook of the language.
I haven't been directly involved in COSMOS for quite some time, but I am not aware of any comprehensive documentation that would explain how the language works, and though it may exist, it certainly doesn't top the search results.
I would also like to point out that there is a somewhat new language also called X#
https://www.xsharp.info/
which Wikipedia boys seem to be confusing our XSharp with.
Two things I would suggest:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: