Talk:Uniterm
Add topicLatest comment: 5 years ago by SL93 in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Uniterm appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 February 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 17:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
( )
- ... that Mortimer Taube designed his Uniterm indexing system for easy automation, and then built a punch card version as the IBM 9900?
Source:Taube's original 1951 paper has this in the abstract
Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 15:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC).
QPQ: Nuclear Gandhi
Article is new, long enough and interestng. It cites sources with inline citations. "Earwig's Copyvio Detector" reports no significant text similarities on online sources. I AGF for offline sources. The hook is well-formatted and interesting. I assume that IBM 9900 is not a machine, but a type of punch card. Its length is within limit. The hook's fact needs to be cited inline, right after the sentence. It seems that no QPQ is required as having less than five DYK credits. Aprovaş will follow after the a.m. issue is addressed. CeeGee 17:13, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
- @CeeGee: This is a composite hook formed from the content of the chapter with ref #4. QPQ is required and provided. Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
- Would you please name the DYK-nom you reviewed for QPQ? I wanted to be sure that IBM 9900, which is compared with punch card, is not a machine. CeeGee 07:51, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
- @CeeGee: The QPQ was there, just not printing out for some reason. The IBM 9900 is a machine. I don't understand the issue with the punch card? The hook states the 9900 is a type of automation using punch cards. I do not see a grammar issue. Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:22, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
I am not satisfied with your respond. Sorry! Maybe a wiser reviewer can help. CeeGee 18:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see an issue with the punched card wording. It's quite clear to me that the IBM 9900 was a machine that used punched cards as their method of information input. The hook's wording does make it seem like Taube built it himself (rather than partnered with IBM, and with a team). CeeGee's concerns about in-line citations remains. Per DYK rules, the citations need to appear at the end of the relevant sentences in the article. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:55, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Starting a new review. This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
