454:
in
Ancient Egypt", I'm going to cite Jaromir Malek, because he's the expert on the subject, and he did all the research. If he isa wikipedia editor, the external source is still good, although it might be considered better if I quoted it in the article than if he did (COI and all that). In Malek's case, the source is of excellent quality as it is published by the British Museum Press. The issue with SpooK's source is the quality (and it is definitely better if he's not the guy adding it to the article), not the fact that it is OR. --
21:
152:
134:
103:
289:
topics, the subject material is not exactly consumer market trivia so you cannot reasonably expect that it has thousands of links to it. Knowledge (XXG) is seriously deficient in technical articles of this type and as long as it has non-technical members interfering with or trying to delete technical matters that they simply are not competent to comment on, it will remain this way.
78:
491:
to update it and keep abreast of changes made to the tool in its continuing development cycle. Before the last tagging for deletion an anonymous editor has already updated the version information and altered the order of the links at the bottom of the page so this capacity is available. I have a number of recommendations for the page in its current forum.
470:
website require the author to execise the appropriate expertise to test the object and this SpooK has done. WHat you are angling for is a chain of citation going back to infinity on the basis that you are assuming any expertise exercised outside of
Knowledge (XXG) is subject to the same limitation on original research.
383:
notable from my viewpoint as the developer of an SDK is the fact that the developer of this assembler is approachable on a one-to-one basis to discuss poosible changes/fixes/additions to the package. This, as far as I am aware, is unheard of before and makes this assembler stand apart from all others.
453:
If you think about it, the external links section should always be original research - ie it should be secondary sources which someone has researched and put together. The question for an external source isn't it's originality, it is its quality. It's obvious - if I'm writing an article about "Cats
288:
I appreciate any help in getting a technical page of this type up and going but it is the second time that a person with no technical experience in this subject has graffitied the page in the short time it has been displayed. While as a matter of fact the page is linked from 2 other assembler related
490:
This page is still in reasonably rudimentary form reflecting the quick sketching out of the current stub with a number of categories and the reference material I could find at the time of creating the page. It does need to be developed into a form where people who continually use JWASM can continue
502:
section needs a leading reference to both the
Microsoft technical data and the Intel manuals so that the reader knows where the example notation is sourced from. The use of assembler notation for the examples is conventional in much the same way as mathematical notation is conventional, if you can
214:
I wonder as to the purpose of preparing to trash an article that is less than 12 hours old when its contents are simply a technical matter. I started the page, added the minimum description of the new assembler and made REFERENCE to the authors own site which contains the technical data supporting
469:
Unit, you are simply mistaken here, original research relates directly to the content of
Knowledge (XXG), not to external information referenced by Wikipeia. Japheth's work is original research, a user writing original code is conducting original research but a technical review on an independent
382:
Note: The GeneSys SDK which was created and is supported by myself (Paul
Brennick) includes JWASM in the package. As a rule, all assemblers included in the package undergo extensive bench testing so as to determine its suitability. JWASM meets this criteria on many levels but what makes it most
345:
The bad manners, arrogance and ignorance of the original deletion notice is unacceptable conduct and seriously damaging to an online encyclopaedia like
Knowledge (XXG). Knowledge (XXG) is dying through years of vandalism by anonymous editors and now deliberate vandalism by non-technical editors
314:
Reference is made to a notice of proposed deletion originating from editor Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC). The grounds for the proposed deletion made less than 12 hours after the article was first started was that it failed to satisfy the criteria of notability.
292:
Playing
Knowledge (XXG) policeman may have its place but the price of interfering with technical articles is an ever increasing number of people abandoning Knowledge (XXG) as is in fact the case with the last month or so of top banners trying to raise money and support.
218:
The notion that an encyclopaedia can only be constructed on seconds hand opinion is flawed in technical terms, there is no reason to assume that there is a body of second hand opinion that knows enough about the subject to say anything useful.
346:
scuttling around
Knowledge (XXG) using automated software to slap graffiti on topic they simply don't understand. The number of crippled or abandoned pages is growing at about the rate that Knowledge (XXG) funding is collapsing.
241:
all over the page when it was less than a day old. A page of this type takes a reasonable amount of work to get it all up and going and having to shovel through a mountain of sh*t is the best reason I can think of to not bother.
514:
3. JWASM is capable of producing binaries for non-Mirosoft operating system versions and explanatory notation may be applicable here to distinguish JWASM from other Unix based assemblers, GAS, FASM, NASM and possibly
266:
No need to use foul language. You've been around long enough to know (a) that you could have got the article together in userspace (b) all
Knowledge (XXG) articles need to demonstrate
230:
written in assembler code. Now this generates yet another problem in that the formatting capacity in
Knowledge (XXG) is designed around formatted text which makes posting code example
428:
Is original research allowed in the external links section? I know that Ellen re-added the link, but does that mitigate the fact that the article is nothing more than
318:
I submit that the notice was issued in error from a person who does not have sufficient historical or technical knowledge to comment on an article of this type.
542:
547:
395:
88:
176:
398:
would be the place to discuss the subject's notability. However, the argument presented here does not address how JWASM meets the criteria of
342:
I propose that the speedy deletion notice be immediately removed and the page be protected from editing or deletion by non technical editors.
327:
4. Various Watcom components are now upgraded in accordance with the Sybase Open Source EULA which fully satisfies the criteria of notability.
237:
I made the effort to try and suppoort Knowledge (XXG) in an area where it is seriously lacking and the result is someone slapped a pile of
215:
the minimum level description. Then I bothered to look up the technical data that comes with the assembler to do the versioning history.
159:
139:
325:
3. Sybase made the Watcom product line open source after it aquisition of Watcom which fully satisfies the criteria of notability.
552:
412:
114:
84:
459:
372:
275:
61:
47:
270:
under the Knowledge (XXG) definition and (c) all you had to do was add the info and take the prod notice off. --
323:
2. Sybase is another old company that predates Knowledge (XXG) and fully satisfies the criteria of notability.
120:
321:
1. Watcom is an old product easily predating Knowledge (XXG) and fully satisfies the criteria of notability.
102:
455:
368:
271:
172:
175:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
37:
20:
524:
476:
353:
300:
256:
31:
389:
77:
438:
408:
520:
472:
349:
296:
252:
336:
6. The author's own site provides detailed reference material, source code and multiple version.
226:
rather than nonsense notions of citation to external data that has no garantee of reliability
503:
accomodate "1 + 1 = 2" as not being original research in arithmetic then you can accomodate,
53:
433:
403:
42:
27:
399:
267:
536:
329:
5. The topic of the page JWASM is independently supported by a number of locations.
495:
1. The copyright string needs to be buried in the reference section via ref tags.
151:
133:
429:
234:
difficult to do properly as the results look appalling on the release page.
168:
164:
245:
My approach is simple, if someone here deletes it, you can write the
96:
72:
15:
528:
480:
463:
447:
417:
376:
357:
304:
279:
260:
163:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
510:as being conventional using assembler notation.
338:7. The topic JWASM has an independent user base.
113:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
87:on 19:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC). The result of
8:
396:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/JWASM
128:
333:(a) The MASM forum. (b) SourceForge.
130:
185:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Computing
157:This redirect is within the scope of
100:
7:
41:Because this page is not frequently
310:Proposed removal of deletion notice
119:It is of interest to the following
45:, present and future discussions,
14:
543:Redirect-Class Computing articles
548:NA-importance Computing articles
150:
132:
101:
76:
19:
83:This article was nominated for
367:(Comment moved from article --
188:Template:WikiProject Computing
1:
179:and see a list of open tasks.
529:09:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
481:06:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
464:23:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
448:22:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
418:13:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
377:09:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
358:23:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
305:05:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
280:09:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
261:00:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
569:
62:Talk:Open Watcom Assembler
145:
127:
222:Almost exclusively the
34:that targets the page:
553:All Computing articles
432:'s original research?
173:information technology
160:WikiProject Computing
57:should take place at:
38:Open Watcom Assembler
402:on Knowledge (XXG).
486:Back to the future
191:Computing articles
115:content assessment
56:
50:
456:Elen of the Roads
424:Original research
416:
386:Paul E. Brennick
369:Elen of the Roads
272:Elen of the Roads
207:
206:
203:
202:
199:
198:
95:
94:
68:
67:
52:
46:
560:
445:
436:
406:
239:FUCKING GRAFFITI
193:
192:
189:
186:
183:
154:
147:
146:
136:
129:
106:
105:
97:
80:
73:
23:
16:
568:
567:
563:
562:
561:
559:
558:
557:
533:
532:
508:
488:
439:
434:
426:
365:
334:
312:
212:
190:
187:
184:
181:
180:
54:requested moves
12:
11:
5:
566:
564:
556:
555:
550:
545:
535:
534:
518:
517:
516:
506:
505:
504:
496:
487:
484:
471:
467:
466:
425:
422:
421:
420:
390:User:PBrennick
364:
361:
339:
337:
332:
330:
328:
326:
324:
322:
311:
308:
285:Magioladitis,
283:
282:
211:
208:
205:
204:
201:
200:
197:
196:
194:
177:the discussion
155:
143:
142:
137:
125:
124:
118:
107:
93:
92:
89:the discussion
81:
70:
66:
65:
58:
40:
35:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
565:
554:
551:
549:
546:
544:
541:
540:
538:
531:
530:
526:
522:
513:
512:
511:
507:mov eax, var
501:
497:
494:
493:
492:
485:
483:
482:
478:
474:
465:
461:
457:
452:
451:
450:
449:
446:
444:
443:
437:
431:
423:
419:
414:
410:
405:
401:
397:
394:
393:
392:
391:
387:
384:
380:
378:
374:
370:
362:
360:
359:
355:
351:
347:
343:
340:
331:
319:
316:
309:
307:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
264:
263:
262:
258:
254:
250:
248:
247:FUCKING THING
243:
240:
235:
233:
229:
225:
220:
216:
209:
195:
178:
174:
170:
166:
162:
161:
156:
153:
149:
148:
144:
141:
138:
135:
131:
126:
122:
116:
112:
108:
104:
99:
98:
91:was redirect.
90:
86:
82:
79:
75:
74:
71:
64:
63:
55:
49:
48:edit requests
44:
39:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
519:
509:
499:
489:
468:
441:
440:
427:
388:
385:
381:
366:
348:
344:
341:
335:
320:
317:
313:
295:
291:
287:
284:
251:
246:
244:
238:
236:
231:
227:
223:
221:
217:
213:
158:
121:WikiProjects
110:
69:
60:
26:This is the
537:Categories
430:User:SpooK
400:notability
363:Notability
268:notability
249:yourself.
404:OrangeDog
182:Computing
169:computing
165:computers
140:Computing
28:talk page
210:untitled
111:redirect
85:deletion
32:redirect
521:Hutch48
515:others.
498:2. The
473:Hutch48
350:Hutch48
297:Hutch48
253:Hutch48
43:watched
171:, and
117:scale.
500:Usage
442:Anode
232:PROOF
224:PROOF
109:This
30:of a
525:talk
477:talk
460:talk
435:Unit
373:talk
354:talk
301:talk
276:talk
257:talk
51:and
59:•
36:•
539::
527:)
479:)
462:)
411:•
379:)
375:)
356:)
303:)
278:)
259:)
228:is
167:,
523:(
475:(
458:(
415:)
413:ε
409:τ
407:(
371:(
352:(
299:(
274:(
255:(
123::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
