Talk:Dragon NaturallySpeaking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Technology WikiProject, a group related to the the study of Technology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] History

Try as I might for a month, I don't understand the first paragraph of the History update. I'm requesting that it be rewritten more clearly. It's like the information is not in order or missing. In it's current form, I cannot get these questions out of my head: 1. How can a precursor product be developed in 1990 but after 1982? 2. What precisely was originally created? Was it "NaturallySpeaking"? Nastajus 19:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

The reason for the L&H bankruptcy was accounting problems in a newly acquired Korean subsidiary, not that a bubble burst (though these may not have been independent). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.2.151 (talk) 08:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please help with citation in this article

Will anyone help fix my reference in this article? I searched all the Wikipedia help, but didn't find one that expressly addressed my needs as a new user. I did the best I can but it is wrong. Thanks. Laurel —Preceding comment was added at 21:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for rewrite / move

I think a better approach would be an article describing "commercial speech recognition products", "speech recognition in common use" or something similar. This article is inaccurate and confusing (esp. wrt. different appliances of speech recognition), and also comes across like an advertisement. Note: I work for a company selling solutions based on Philips SpeechMagic. Bjornarl (talk) 10:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for removal of external links

Almost all external links refer to a comercial site selling Dragon NaturallySpeaking. These links should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.163.126.147 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 13 December 2007

The ELs have been cleaned up. Also, a request has been made to fix this article's name. The product's official name is Dragon NaturallySpeaking. Per naming conventions, that is what the article's name should be. Collectonian (talk) 03:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] From WP:RM

I'm copying this request from Wikipedia:Requested moves#Uncontroversial proposals.

This was listed as uncontroversial, but it seems clear from the above talk page that the move is not uncontroversial, and that previous discussion has resulted in the current name, NaturallySpeaking. If anyone can demonstrate consensus for a renaming, then I'll be happy to help out with any necessary deletions or history repair.

I would note that our naming conventions generally call for, not the official names of subjects, but rather the names most commonly used in English language sources that are independent of the subject. Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) for more information. -GTBacchus(talk) 21:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

A nearly three year old discussion shouldn't really apply, to me, for determining consensus, particularly when the only reason for using NaturallySpeaking seems to be "because its shorter." For my argument for renaming, the program is most commonly called Dragon NaturallySpeaking, not just "NaturallySpeaking". That is the name the article should use. If a google search can be used to show this: 135,000 for "Dragon NaturallySpeaking" versus 61,900 for "NaturallySpeaking" -Dragon (and several of those results have nothing to do with the program, but with consultant firms and other items named "Naturally Speaking"Collectonian (talk) 21:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

I believe this article should be renamed to from NaturallySpeaking to Dragon NaturallySpeaking as that is the official and proper name of the software. It is written "Dragon NaturallySpeaking" on the box and in most sales advertisements. People may refer to it by the short name of NaturallySpeaking, but that does not mean it is the best name for the article. The Microsoft Office article isn't just called "Office", nor is the Microsoft Word article just called "Word" which are the "common" names for those software packages. I see no reason to use the short name here either. Collectonian (talk) 03:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree with moving to Dragon NaturallySpeaking. I should point out that right now Dragon Naturally Speaking 9.5 (an article name we shouldn't end up using because the version number is not a useful part of the title) is currently redirecting to this talk page instead of the article; I'm going to go change the redirect. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 05:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
The editor who tried to move it is a new editor, so (hopefully) it was just a careless mistake. However, it shouldn't have been moved yet, as it was controversial before and Admin Action is needed to properly move. The 9.5 one should be deleted, as it is a wholly improper name. Collectonian (talk) 06:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)