Talk:Internet: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Dan Nessett (→Need to expand section on history of the Internet: new section) |
imported>Dan Nessett |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
In some side conversations, it is noted that an article on the Internet would benefit from a discussion of its history. This would include a discussion of the technologies that led up to the internet as well as a discussion of the technologies used currently. This is a reasonable point and deserves discussion. So, let me open the discussion in this section. Those who have an opinion on this issue are hereby invited to provide it here. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 04:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC) | In some side conversations, it is noted that an article on the Internet would benefit from a discussion of its history. This would include a discussion of the technologies that led up to the internet as well as a discussion of the technologies used currently. This is a reasonable point and deserves discussion. So, let me open the discussion in this section. Those who have an opinion on this issue are hereby invited to provide it here. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 04:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
: I will start this conversation by providing my view. I would expect that an article named '''Internet''' would provide a broad overview of the subject. This includes its history, its structure and its uses. I think the article would benefit from an expansion of the history section, but I think the level of detail in the article [[Development of the Internet]] is inappropriate for a high-level article. So, my position is those who are interested in expanding the history section should summarize the material in the [[Development of the Internet]] article and place that summary in the history section of the Internet article. Some have suggested rolling back the Internet article to the old material (which was renamed [[Development of the Internet]]). I am opposed to this because it misrepresents the meaning of the article title (i.e., '''Internet'''). If an article with the title '''Jet Planes''' contained only a detailed description of their history and no description of their design and use, I would say the article is misnamed. By the same argument, I think an article titled '''Internet''' that only discusses its development is misnamed. [[User:Dan Nessett|Dan Nessett]] 04:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:48, 19 September 2009
Why did you delete most of the text in the Internet architecture section?
Howard,
Most of the material in the Internet architecture section is deleted. Why did you do that? Dan Nessett 17:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm. This is a mystery. I just looked at the history of the article and it doesn't look like Howard deleted anything. And yet, the text is now missing. I will contact CZ admins for some help with this. Dan Nessett 17:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- See my note on Matt's talk page. Hayford Peirce 18:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Newsgroups
In the first paragraph, newsgroups/usenet should be mentioned along with email and ftp. (I don't add it myself, so that noone can claim I added content in case of an approval.) Peter Schmitt 01:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Done. Dan Nessett 03:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Need to expand section on history of the Internet
In some side conversations, it is noted that an article on the Internet would benefit from a discussion of its history. This would include a discussion of the technologies that led up to the internet as well as a discussion of the technologies used currently. This is a reasonable point and deserves discussion. So, let me open the discussion in this section. Those who have an opinion on this issue are hereby invited to provide it here. Dan Nessett 04:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- I will start this conversation by providing my view. I would expect that an article named Internet would provide a broad overview of the subject. This includes its history, its structure and its uses. I think the article would benefit from an expansion of the history section, but I think the level of detail in the article Development of the Internet is inappropriate for a high-level article. So, my position is those who are interested in expanding the history section should summarize the material in the Development of the Internet article and place that summary in the history section of the Internet article. Some have suggested rolling back the Internet article to the old material (which was renamed Development of the Internet). I am opposed to this because it misrepresents the meaning of the article title (i.e., Internet). If an article with the title Jet Planes contained only a detailed description of their history and no description of their design and use, I would say the article is misnamed. By the same argument, I think an article titled Internet that only discusses its development is misnamed. Dan Nessett 04:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)