Talk:DragonFly BSD/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 21:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'll review this article. I usually copy edit as I go but feel free to revert anything I do. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- review
- "Due to ongoing conflicts with other FreeBSD developers over the implementation of his ideas,[4] and other reasons, his ability to directly change the FreeBSD code was eventually revoked." - "and other reasons" sounds a little vague - can you be more specific, or else reword it?
- e.g. Due to ongoing conflicts with other FreeBSD developers over the implementation of his ideas, his ability to directly change the FreeBSD code was eventually revoked.
- I repeated Matthew Dillon in the article, as everything in the lede must be in the body of the article.
- is "useland" a regular term, or is it slang or jargon? Do you really mean userspace?
- I'm having difficulty accessing the sources, as they time out e.g. www.kerneltrap.org/node/14116 - if you get the chance you could archive them at WebCite.
- There is a lot of "as well as" and "such as" - I'll try to reduce them.
- how does the link to subsystem help? - it's not computer specific.
(will continue) MathewTownsend (talk) 22:04, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- I came here when these "other reasons" were already in place. I hoped to come across them, but then just forgot them at all. Now removed them.
- "Userland" is a term that denotes the processes that run outside the kernel. There probably is some more formal term, but this word is the most common naming.
- I'll walk through the sources with "archive.org" – all of them are archived there, I believe. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 22:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- Unlinked subsystem. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 22:22, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- "is arguably the key" - is this a weasel word?
- Removed the sentence: it didn't tell anything new anyway.
- continue
- SMP - is this Symmetric multiprocessing or Symmetric Multiprocessor System, or what? - whenever possible, spell out the abbreviation on first mention (for people like me).
- Hard to say: these article share the same topic. I changed "SMP systems" to "Symmetric Multiprocessor Systems", next entry of "SMP" to "symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)" and unlinked the third one. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 23:51, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- reply
This is a nice little article. Just one more thing:
- Both "Protecting shared resources" (unreferenced section) and "Memory management" (under referenced section) need citations.
MathewTownsend (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- I removed the most part of "Memory management" and merged the rest into "Protecting shared resources". The unreferenced material there was a bit misrepresenting the situation, as the difference between DragonFly's approach and the rest of Unix-like system is not that substantial. All the SFBUF/MSFBUF stuff was interesting for OS developers back then, but wasn't and still isn't of any interest to the rest of us, and as such didn't receive any coverage.
- I added a couple of references to the "Protecting shared resources". Actually, the most part of the section is the explanation of SMP concept with only small DF-specific bits being the statements likely to be challenged, and these statements are covered in the references I linked. Unfortunately I couldn't find secondary sources on the topic, and I don't think there are such, as the whole thing is of technical detail that don't normally get past code and mailing lists, as it doesn't interfere with end users. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 08:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- ok! MathewTownsend (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
- B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Provides references to all sources:
- B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Provides references to all sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Main aspects are addressed:
- B. Remains focused:
- A. Main aspects are addressed:
- Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Congratuations! Nice work. MathewTownsend (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail: