Talk:Dired

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Improve references[edit]

http://www.saildart.org/prog/DOC/html/002962?4293,31330 is undated, no author given. It does mention Stan Kugell.
http://www.saildart.org/prog/DOC/html/002482?4330,15360 mentions Stan Kugell, gives a copyright date (but no publication date).

Tedickey 16:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Claims not supported by references[edit]

It was quickly incorporated into Emacs, re-implemented in other operating systems, and became the basis for modern windows oriented file directory displays.

This says three things:

While there is a sense that Emacs incorporated ideas from dired, none of the references point out what, or when. (Emacs documentation does not mention the dired program).
The reference mentioning Stan Kugell does not provide any information that would indicate that it was for a different operating system. The statement uses a plural; only one example is given (and as noted, it is flawed).
Separate from the two examples (Emacs and the other program), there are no examples or references given to support the statement that it "became the basis", etc.

Tedickey 16:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

confusing external link?[edit]

Maybe the first link should rather point to: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Dired.html ? That's the more general Dired section in the GNU Emacs Manual, while the other one ist just concerned with the special Dired-X package. Confused me for a second...

Plentyonuttin (talk) 11:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

unsourced promotional edits[edit]

We've been here before. There are no WP:RS supporting a statement like that. Not even on your resume. TEDickey (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

no Kugell in source[edit]

The given source is undated, and does not provide any of the cited metadata (author, publisher, etc). It is (at the moment) only a dump of a help-file, which doesn't provide in itself any useful information for the purpose for which it is used TEDickey (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference added for above. Skugell (talk) 13:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reference doesn't tell me anything useful; it at most implies that "SGK" owned a copy of the file, doesn't make any statement about authorship. If you need advice, try reading the guidelines WP:RS is a place to start. At the moment, you are doing WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, and apparently WP:COI in all of your edits TEDickey (talk) 22:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

reference for first?[edit]

A primary source cannot be used for promotional statements such as that. TEDickey (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Even worse, the sources given don't actually make a claim that they are the first, second, or otherwise. They're merely some files that happen to be old. There may well be other, earlier file managers that Dired took inspiration from. Those citations simply do not address history or development, either way. If we were comparing those old files with some other old files and saying "See? These files are oldest", that would at least be original research, but the article doesn't even go that far. So, I've added {{citation needed span}} to highlight "first", and {{failed verification}} to make it clear that those citations aren't helpful for the problem. (I'm leaving the citations as they might reasonably be useful for chasing actual sources for the claims. But if someone else wants to remove them, I wouldn't object.) —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 15:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - if the statement had been along the lines of "an early", etc., then it would be less noticeable (those "first" statements always need a reliable source other than the developer of course). TEDickey (talk) 19:41, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dired. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150903224616/http://www.saildart.org/PHONE.LST%5BP%2CDOC%5D23 to http://www.saildart.org/PHONE.LST%5BP%2CDOC%5D23

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]