User talk:Oscarg

Welcome, Oscarg!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions!
You might like to check out our tutorial, a resource created especially for new users like yourself.
You also may want to introduce yourself to the community at the new user log.
I would suggest a look through our policies and guidelines.
If you have any questions, you can ask me on my talk page, or at our questions forum.
I hope very much you enjoy being here with us, and I wish you luck with your contributions.

- Zapptastic at 23:58, Tuesday, May 21, 2024 (UTC)

Copyright problems[edit]

Hello, Oscarg. Concerning your contribution, Hank Baird, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material without the permission of the author. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.codeonemagazine.com/events/apr_06/apr06_events20.html. As a copyright violation, Hank Baird appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Hank Baird has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Hank Baird and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Hank Baird with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Hank Baird.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. JohnCD (talk) 11:50, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nested RAID levels[edit]

Oscar, I saw your recent edit to Nested RAID levels and noticed that there was a lot of wording you took out and then replaced with an unsourced (or unexplained) claim.
If you don't mind, I'm going to revert your edit for now, and if you want we can discuss the change you want to make, and see if we can come to a good conclusion.
We can discuss it either here or on the talk page for the article – doesn't matter to me.
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 03:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Garrettw87.

Thanks for your efforts - much appreciated - people like you make Wikipedia great (sorry for the cliche).

I Believe you were correct to revert the entry.

It is making me research this issue correctly as I should have in the first place :)

I know the part I replaced was factually incorrect in both its premise and conclusion, and was unsourced. I guess my initial entry was a "shoot from the hip response" to that. I intend to make my next one correct, succinct and sourced...

Here is where I am at...

RAID 10 standard will in most cases outperform RAID 5 (and all other RAID levels other than 0), and will at least equal it otherwise (assuming same number of drives etc)

Here are some benchmarks which confirm that.

Enhanced RAID 10 allowing simultaneous requests

The technology which I spoke of, which enables simultaneous reads, and in some cases read/writes only for RAID 10 was explained to me a few years ago for Windows Server 2003 machine on HP hardware. I assumed it was available, at least on high end RAID controllers. I will leave that out until I find some evidence for it.

I will wait for your response before I make the change.

BTW How many sources do you think is appropriate? 1? 3? 5?

I am attempting to find the most authoritative sources - i.e. commercial reports for commercial devices, rather than bloggers reviewing their motherboard controllers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oscarg (talk • contribs) 10:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that's more like it!

I appreciate your willingness to communicate and your desire to be of help to the 'pedia.

I understand your original edits now. Also as far as how many sources are appropriate, I think WP:CITEKILL has a good rule of thumb: no more than about 3. Pick the one(s) you feel are the most reliable or that back up your edit the strongest.

Lastly, please sign your messages by typing ~~~~ after them. Cheers
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 20:00, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Garrettw87, I think you replaced "performance" with throughput. Throughput is a subset of performance which also includes latency and average queue length. I will change the word. I believe the word performance is more accurate and precise. Hope thats OK Oscarg (talk) 13:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me if you think so.
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 04:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 8K Video Format[edit]

A tag has been placed on 8K Video Format requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Anna Lincoln 10:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Japanese destroyer Tanikaze (1940), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hiryu and Devastator. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]