Talk:Cobranet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Cobranet vs. CobraNet
The correct capitalization is CobraNet. Does anyone know how to tweak page name to get this correct? I've tried moving Cobranet -> CobraNet but it is not allowed. --Kvng (talk) 22:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] CobraNet 0, 1, 2
Hey Snottywong, what's with the insistence on documenting different genres of CobraNet? Sure, before the technology was fully commercialized, we installed a few boxes that won't interoperate with current CobraNet. I don't consider that wrinkle relevant to the Wikipedia audience. The protocol running on the first CobraNet products (QSC RAVE) ever shipped is compatible with CobraNet as it currently exists. Since first shipments, new features and bug fixes have been introduced in an interoperable and backwards compatible manner. The genres of CobraNet perspective was never advanced by Peak Audio or Cirrus Logic. The only reference where I've seen the 0, 1, 2 designations is in some very early articles written by Michael Karagosian.--Kvng (talk) 22:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Good Article!
I used the criteria at "Wikipedia:What is a good article?" to evaluate teh article. I feel that it meets the criteria.
Note that the "retrieved" dates in the references are red links. I'm not sure how to fix these. -Arch dude 20:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- I fixed the retrieved dates in the references section. The dates were just in the wrong format (didn't have a leading 0 for the month, i.e. 2007-3-19 instead of 2007-03-19). Thanks. Snottywong 23:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] archived fac
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cobranet/archive1. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)