Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Architecture of Windows 2000

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Architecture of Windows 2000

Self-nomination (yes, I know the history says Mav contributed it). This was split from the recently promoted Windows 2000 article, only due to size issues of that article (when it was removed that page went from 59K to 45K). I put a large amount of time and research into this, and would like to now see if this could become a featured article. Note that I realise that this is my second FAC nomination, but I intend to polish both articles if objections are made. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:27, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Support Everyking 12:21, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Eggs-cellent. :D Phils 18:43, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Support, nice job. Neutrality^talk 19:50, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Support My edit comment gave you credit. :P The only part I'm responsible for is the lead section, which was a summary of the ==Architecture== section at Windows 2000 (itself a summary of the body text in this article that Ta bu shi da yu wrote). --mav 23:36, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Oh, folks, I forgot to mention that an objection was raised on PR. It is:

  "Maybe I'm dumb, but could I ask you to please state the obvious. I had trouble understanding the first two paragraphs even. Quick quote:

  'Windows 2000 is a 32-bit, preemptible, interruptible operating system, which has been designed to work with either uniprocessor or symmetrical multi processor (SMP) based Intel x86 computers. To process I/O requests, uses packet driven I/O which utilise I/O request packets (IRPs) and asynchronous I/O. However, Windows 2000 is known as a hybrid operating system as the microkernel is essentially the kernel, while higher-level services are implemented by the executive, which exists in kernel mode. User mode in Windows 2000 is made of subsystems capable of passing I/O requests to the appropriate kernel mode drivers by using the I/O manager.'

  I don't know what you mean by 32-bit or preemtible or interruptible or SMP, etc. are. I don't know what I/O requests are. And this may shock you considering how the article dives right into it, but I don't even know what kernel mode and user mode are. I know it sounds stupid, but explaining jargon goes a long way towards making the article accessible to normal people like me.

• Now I actually agree with this, however I'm unsure how to explain these things in the lead section, which is almost too long already. Showuld we add a broad overview of Windows 2000 in an overview section and explain some of these concepts there? What do people think? - Ta bu shi da yu 00:28, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I saw that comment on peer review, and was about to raise that point but after some thought, I chose not to. If you look at other technical eatured articles, like Lesch-Nyhan syndrome, PaX, Helicobacter pylori, Electronic amplifier, Margin of error, you'll see they all more or less assume the reader has some knowledge of the field. An article about a specific product like Windows 2000 should be technically precise; explanations for laymen belong in operating system, RAM, CPU, kernel, etc... Phils 09:22, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Object Comment Well, while it's clear that the Article on Windows 2000 with 59K should be considered a little bid to long, this article seems too short. I realise that more detail on such a technical issue could be a tough for the ordinary reader, however in general a FA should have a certain length. So I'll object. Themanwithoutapast 22:49, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Hold on... exactly what bits do you want me to expand?! And since when has a size of 24KB been a major issue for FAs? - Ta bu shi da yu 23:43, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  It certainly doesn't look like 24KB, ... and I know that it isn't quantity what counts, however because I cannot give a specific topic that should be expanded (I am not familiar with software-architecture and what is important) I change my object to comment. Themanwithoutapast 01:26, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  It's just a little bit under 24KB. This includes notes, comments and references. If further information needs to be added then I will update accordingly (there is one thing that Nicalp has asked for on the talk page, will be done soon). - Ta bu shi da yu 01:33, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)