Jump to content

Talk:FR-V (microprocessor)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to FR-V (microprocessor) —Darkwind (talk) 04:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


FR-V → Fujitsu FR-V – I propose moving this article over its redirect Fujitsu FR-V in order to streamline it with other articles of microprocessors including the vendor name. FR-V should continue to exist as a redirect to the article in the new location (at least for now, see below).

Reasoning: Most other microprocessor, microcontroller and signal processor articles in Wikipedia (actually most products of any kind) include the corresponding company name as the product code is often used for many different products of different companies. FR-V is one of the few exceptions in the processor category, and it is a particularly short and ambiguous one as well. We already have articles on two "FR-V"s, the Honda FR-V and the Fujitsu FR-V, and there are more articles under this name in other-language-Wikipedias, so it is likely that we will have more articles under this abbreviation in the future. For example, the ISO-3166-2 code for the French Rhône-Alpes is FR-V as well. As per WP:CRITERIA, the title should meet the following five criteria: Recognizability, naturalness, precision, conciseness, and consistency. The current title does not meet the two criteria of precision and consistency, whereas the proposed new title fulfills all five criteria. Relisted. BDD (talk) 18:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC) --Matthiaspaul (talk) 00:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Matthiaspaul imho intentionally makes wrong statements as he knows the microprocessors well: Microprocessors are USUALLY without manufacturer name:

Pentium Itanium Xeon Phi XScale

MAJC MB86900 MicroSPARC OpenSPARC SPARC SuperSPARC

UltraSPARC UltraSPARC II UltraSPARC III UltraSPARC IV UltraSPARC T1 UltraSPARC T2 SPARC T3

MC88100 MC88110

PowerPC 400 PowerPC 600 PowerPC 970 PowerPC A2 POWER1 POWER2 POWER3 POWER4 POWER5 POWER6 POWER7 PowerPC 7xx PowerPC 5000 PowerPC 7xx PowerPC G4 PowerQUICC

Alpha 21064 Alpha 21064A Alpha 21066 Alpha 21066A Alpha 21068 Alpha 21068A Alpha 21164 Alpha 21264 Alpha 21364 Alpha 21464 CVAX MicroPRISM MicroVAX 78032 NVAX StrongARM V-11 VAX

PowerPC e200 PowerPC e300 PowerPC e500 PowerPC e5500 PowerPC e600 PowerPC e6500 PowerPC e700 PowerPC 5000 PowerPC 7xx

R10000 R3000 R4000 R4200 R6000 R8000

R4600 R5000

PA-7100 PA-7100LC PA-7150 PA-7200 PA-7300LC PA-8000 PA-RISC

Excluding manufacturer names is according to Wikipedia policies. It should continue to be streamlined with the other microprocessors and other products: iPods, iPhones, iMacs, Mac Pro, Mac Mini and so on.
The Honda is directly linked on top of FR-V. With FR-V being a disambiguation nothing is improved. It is the less frequently visited article and the future use is expected lower, as he is discontinued. Tagremover (talk) 08:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How do you know that Honda FR-V is less frequently visited? Actually, I'm quite sure, it's the other way around, as the Fujitsu FR-V processor is only in the scope of interest to a small group of embedded system programmers (and perhaps some technophile owners of devices using this processor), whereas cars are in the scope of the common people. Internationally, we have three articles on the Fujitsu FR-V processor, and twelve articles on the Honda FR-V car in Wikipedia. Googling for FR-V will list Honda related articles and pictures first and processor related entries are not among the first few pages of hits. So, we'd even have to swap the articles for a proper implementation of this kind of disambiguation. (No, I'm not proposing this.) At least, FR-V is not a primary title for Fujitsu processors any more so than it would be for the Honda car, therefore, we should not normally use this hatnote type of disambiguation here.
Further, the hatnote type of disambiguation can be used for as long as we have two articles, but a proper disambiguation page is preferred for three and more articles. The German Wikipedia already has a disambiguation page under de:FR-V, and I know of more topics named FR-V, which would need disambiguation in the future (check Google). The point is, that FR-V is not precise, and therefore a title FR-V for the Fujitsu processor does not fulfill WP:CRITERIA. That's why we should move it to a better place - also to make room for more articles belonging there.
Regarding your "iPod" etc. examples. These examples are not comparible to our situation as iPod etc. are much more in common use than FR-V, a term most people on this planet will have not the slightest clue what it might stand for, and among those few who do, most would associate a car rather than a processor with it. Further, "iPod" does not need natural disambiguation by vendor name, because all iPods are manufactured by Apple and there are no other products named iPod. It's a very strong trademark. FR-V is not a strong trademark in comparision, as we already have (among others) Fujitsu FR-V and Honda FR-V products. Out of context, FR-V alone is not enough to describe the product.
Regarding your processor article list of exceptions above, while they don't include the vendor name, most of these article names are still based on a combination of two words starting with the family name for natural disambiguation (without the family name, they would be very ambiguous and have the same problem as FR-V). The single-word articles at least contain a combination of letters and numbers, makeing it less likely to match other names. None of them is as ambiguous as FR-V. So, your list actually supports my argument that FR-V is not precise enough to be a valid article title by itself.
Finally, at a cursory look over the processor articles in Wikipedia in general I find way more articles including the vendor name, in particular if including redirects as well (as you did). If you look at other articles on product families, including the vendor name is a omnipresent concept as most product names by itself are not unique enough to make them distinguishable from other products. To mention just a few groups of articles you are certainly aware of yourself as an example, just think about articles on cameras / lenses, computers, hifi equipment, cars.
I won't comment on the personal diffamation part, as it is totally groundless. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tagremover: "Excluding manufacturer names is according to Wikipedia policies".
There is no such policy, so this is clearly a wrong statement. (You will really have to learn to back up your claims by references to our guidelines, as many editors, including myself, have repeatedly related to you already.) --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No time for a long reply, but: See below. Tagremover (talk) 15:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, on a cursory look over our processor articles I find way more articles where the name is disambiguated naturally by adding the family or vendor name, rather than by "(artificial disambiguation)". Even most of the names in Tagremover's (otherwise questionable) list above use natural disambiguation. That's why I prefer "Fujitsu FR-V" over "FR-V (microprocessor)". --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Adding family/architecture name is rather common. But we are talking about adding the vendor name here, ( FR-V is already the architecture name ). The two major exceptions that I'm aware of where the designer name is used as part of the name are the DEC Alpha and the Motorola 68000 series, though that is often called M68k. Also note that the F in FR-V stands for Fujitsu which means adding Fujitsu in the front is a bit redundant. Similar to calling something a CRT tube. Note I Support a move to FR-V (processor) or FR-V (microprocessor) and making FR-V a disambiguation page. PaleAqua (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. While I still prefer the natural disambiguation style, I could support FR-V (processor) or FR-V (microprocessor) (whatever is more common) as well. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Natural disambiguation is far preferable to parenthetical disambiguation, so "FR-V (processor)" and "FR-V (microprocessor)" are easily ruled out as they are not used by sources; the proposed title is used by sources. The move would then make room for a disambiguation page. bobrayner (talk) 14:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    My reading of WP:NCDAB does seems to give equal weight to using natural or parenthetical disambiguation. With the note that the approach already used for other similar articles it should be used. When looking at the choices made by other processors it seems to be the more common approach. As a software tool programmer specializing in compilers and debuggers, what I seen is that the names without the manufactures names prepended are the WP:COMMONNAME as Tagremover states above. When looking at the official documentation the official name clearly is also FR-V, the few places I've seen the name prefixed with Fujitsu is the possessive form such as Fujitsu's FR-V. PaleAqua (talk) 16:59, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, our goal is to find an article with matches all WP:CRITERIA. Among those meeting all the criteria are "Fujitsu FR-V" and "FR-V (microprocessor)", but not "FR-V", as it is not precise (as per the definition in our guidelines). There are other topics, which could just as well exist under "FR-V", I even assume, that there are more people looking for the Honda car under FR-V, than the microprocessor. "FR-V" and "Fujitsu FR-V" are both natural, and it is only normal, that you find the shorter FR-V more often for as long as you are in context as for example on a Fujitsu website, book or datasheet. However, this is Wikipedia, not our developers' manual, and an abbreviation or name like FR-V is not naturally in the context of Fujitsu here. I know of at least three other meanings of "FR-V", two of which already exist as articles in Wikipedias (and one of them even in the English WP). FR-V in Wikipedia is ambiguous, not precise, therefore not a valid title as per WP:CRITERIA. That's why I propose the move to a title which does fulfill all our criteria. And if you check Google, there are even many more meanings of FR-V.
You are right that the guidelines gives equal weight to natural forms like "Fujitsu FR-V" and disambiguated forms like "FR-V (microprocessor)" (subject to community consensus on a case-by-case basis). Personally I find the former much better, as it is my impression that it is far more common to include the vendor name than to add "(disambiguation)" not only when scanning over the existing processor articles, but also in Wikipedia in general (not the English Wikipedia alone). Also, if we have a choice, I prefer "natural" over "artificial". Nevertheless, if it helps to find a consensus, I could live with "FR-V (microprocessor)" as well. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by this? Please elaborate, as this does not appear a valid argument based on our guidelines.
Our scope is to build an encyclopedia in the best-possible way (according to our guidelines), not to provide a static repository for some unknown external sites. Also, for as long as we don't swap the articles on the Fujitsu FR-V series and the Honda FR-V (on grounds that there are certainly more people looking for the car under FR-V than for an embedded systems processor), my proposal made it clear that the redirect from FR-V to Fujitsu FR-V should remain intact (at least for as long as we don't actually need the disambiguation page), so even though this is not our responsibility, any existing incoming links from third-parties will not break, but continue to work as before.
The point, however, remains, FR-V by itself is short, but not precise as there are various other topics, which could reside under this same title as well. Therefore, FR-V is not conformant with our guidelines (WP:CRITERIA) for article titles, as explained above. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No time for a long reply, but:
  1. Its a fact that Wikis policies prefer short names
  2. FR-V as well as Honda FR-V exist since 2005:
    1. Without problems
    2. WP:TITLECHANGES#Considering_title_changes can be seen as discouraging of changing working titles
  3. Matthiaspaul fantasies about a majority of microprocessor titles including manufacturer: See my long list above. Although there are "longer" microprocessor titles, this is only in case of serious name conflicts: A minority.
  4. Fact: Disambiguation page for ONLY 2 articles has:
    1. No improvement
    2. Delays accessing FR-V
    3. Is unusual
  5. FR-V has a bit more page views than Honda FR-V, which is no longer in production
  6. Since 2005 established links outside Wikipedia will be no longer really (directly) valid. Tagremover (talk) 15:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes conciseness is one of the things to take into account when naming articles but it is not the only one. The fact the the names have been used since 2005 means that any changes require a move review which this is. I agree that vendor / designer should is not the normal prefix and thus does not meet the case for natural disambiguation. FR-V has been viewed 6869 times in November vs 4865 for Honda FR-V, especially if you consider that some of the views landing at FR-V may have been looking for the Honda page. That doesn't seem to be enough difference to make one as a primary topic. Per WP:2DAB If neither of the two meanings is primary, then a normal disambiguation page is used at the base name.. PaleAqua (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FACT: The current FR-V is absolutely clearly the PRIMARY article visitors expect to see.
See Wikipedia:TWODABS#Is_there_a_primary_topic.3F: Number of Google links, visitors or else are SECONDARY determining factors, ONLY important if it is difficult to make it clear what visitors expect.
A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term.
WHO seriously doubts that BOTH articles existing since 2005 under the same name, visitors are directed to the right article???
  1. Special:WhatLinksHere/FR-V Any Hondas?
  2. Special:WhatLinksHere/Honda_FR-V Any microprocessors?
FACT: PRIMARY article because it has NO visitors from other meanings. Visitors are CLEARLY unrelated:
  1. Compare especially 2009-04-09 or -021: Traffic statistics FR-V 200904 and Traffic statistics Honda FR-V 200904
  2. Compare especially 2009-06-12, -20,-27: Traffic statistics FR-V 200906 and Traffic statistics Honda FR-V 200906
Since 2005 this works REALLY GOOD! Number of visitors largely increased for FR-V, but because of article improvements. And: Honda FR-V is discontinued!
FACT: The current FR-V is already streamlined with other microprocessor article titles.
Contrary statements, also if they are repeated several times, stay wrong. Reasons above.
Wikipedia uses different schemes for base names. See:
  1. FR-V is the base name for a microprocessor. Or many other products with strong relations to computer hardware, see my statements above, or Xbox, or MANY MORE.
  2. Honda FR-V is the base name for a car.
Some supporters seem to confuse the primary expected article by visitors with additional meanings. For this already a link is included: WP:2DAB: "The recommended practice in these situations is to place a hatnote on the primary topic article to link directly to the secondary topic."
Additionally reasons see my statements above. Emphased facts in this very long discussion. Tagremover (talk) 07:06, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on FR-V (microprocessor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on FR-V (microprocessor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:05, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:FR-V_(microprocessor)&oldid=1201145393"