Talk:Career domains in computer science

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] TODO list

• creating pages for terms fidelity (audio quality), decoding (DSP).
• Wikipedia style conformance: provide citations.

[edit] Concerns

I have several concerns about the content of this article (beyond the lack of citations):

1. Subsections such as "prerequisites" and "why one should consider it" feel too much like how-to information to me. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. I don't think we should be offering career guidance here.
2. I fear that the "illustrative companies" subsections will end up going in one of two directions, either (a) lengthy (yet still noncomprehensive) lists, or (b) bones of contention for claims of a non-neutral point of view since they promote some companies over others.
3. I'm skeptical that what would be left once the problem areas are excised will ever constitute an encyclopedic article. It might make sense to include the remaining material as a section of the Computer science article.

I'm tempted to nominate the article for deletion, but am willing to wait and see if my concerns can be addressed. --Allan McInnes (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Allan, thank you for listing the observations. I request that let's not haste to delete an article created by a newcomer to WP like me. You may agree that like with any othr learning, hands-on experimentation offers the best path. While there may be areas of improvement for making this article compliant with WP policies, other editors can help me achieve that while I learn the right ways! You have already pointed me to the policies and I am working my way through them. Some points to consider in justification of this article:

1. I agree with your POV on 'Prerequisites' subsections. I intend to remove those.
2. Ditto for the 'Illustrative companies'.
3. The article Computer Science is already too long and very well written to WP standards. I was aware that the contents I was proposing to add with this article needed some work to catch up with the higher standards of contents and style. Hence I created this separate article and simply added a reference to it in the Computer Science article. For better readability, I suggest we still maintain this as a separate article.
4. About citing sources, I intend to add a {{unreferenced|date=August 2006}} tag so that other contributors can consider to help add more. I have already cited reference to an IEEE article.

With this, I propose to remove following from the article source: {{howto}} once the prerequisites sub-sections are removed and {{citations missing}} right away.

I also intend to invoke a formal peer review. Need to read and understand that section before I get a chance to do that.

Note to all editors: I appreciate and welcome your comments. Please bear with me--a working newcomer individual--as I contribute from my scarce personal time to write here. It will take me some time to act on the comments/ reply or until I start contributing at the higher standards for contents and style. At the minimum, I try not to make obvious mistakes. Thank you! --Raanoo 14:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of "unreferenced" tag

I am not convinced that the "unreferenced" tag should have been removed. At this point, there is a single reference which is, by implication, a blanket source for all material in the article. However, the cited reference does not appear to be the source of most of the information given in the article. Even if we assume that the given citation is simply for the names of the career domains, rather than all of the information, the reference is not helpful: the list of career domains given at the IEEE site doesn't match the list given in this article at all.

A somewhat more useful reference might be the "Computer and mathematical occupations" section of this Bureau of Labor Statistics website. However its list of career domains also diverges quite strongly from the list given in the current incarnation of the article. But it may still be possible to extract some useful references for information about specific career domains.

I'd also like to reiterate my concern that this article is not appropriate for Wikipedia. The stated intent of the article, i.e.

This article is intended for CS aspirants to help them consider options available at the beginning of their career.

does not seem like a particularly encyclopedia-like goal to me. I'm sure the information is useful. I just don't think it belongs in an encyclopedia. --Allan McInnes (talk) 17:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I intend to do something about this article (moving to Wikibooks, for example). Please bear with me for I cannot commit when that will happen. Though the contents do not fit here, I sincerely wish to share the knowledge. Hope that is appreciated... Raanoo 04:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Noticed one more comment about moving this article to Wikibooks. I am still in agreement of that move. Someone with spare cycles with them, please help me--will be highly appreciated. Raanoo 13:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)