Talk:Commodore 8050

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Commodore 8050. 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/20110203060910/http://www.commodoremagazine.com/2010/05/commodore-dual-disk-drives.html to http://www.commodoremagazine.com/2010/05/commodore-dual-disk-drives.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Memory specifications
has enhanced the memory specification in the infobox to read, "4 kB RAM (2114 x 8) 16 kB ROM (6364 x 2)". I don't think it would be clear to readers what the parenthetical expressions mean. The reference is not readily helpful though the anon editor explains, "The numbers do "add up" and are detailed in the reference. Please see page 4 of the reference if unfamiliar with reading the schematics in the reference. Page 24 also details these parts." I know how to read schematics and am not able to get there. It turns out these are the part numbers of the memory chips. I had removed the parentheticals but 72.234.220.38 reverted. It seems like this detailed information should be covered in the body before being added as a cryptic parenthetical to the infobox. ~Kvng (talk) 13:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Interesting. But should an editor's "not understanding" be used as a reason justifying removal over our common WP:STATUSQUO standard. If anything, taking this to the talk page first would seem appropriate.  There would be a lot of undos if people started browsing quantum physics or molecular biology articles and redacting technical parts they do not understand or were not fully clear to them. I'll proffer that someone unfamiliar with this era of computing would find "CPU: MOS 6502 @ 1 MHz" cryptic – this, and similar notations, are used on dozens of related article infoboxes.


 * That being said: The referenced data is actually on page 5 . What I've done is re-edited the article's infobox adding different formatting and extra wikilinks to the named memory chip parts.  This should make it clearer and assist in people's better understanding of the tech.  I'll also keep this in mind during future article edits of this sort.


 * Often one will find that in many articles, the "{{Infobox information appliance" infoboxes is where the "detailed information" or technical minutia is placed rather than into the body of the article. If you feel this should also be expanded into the boby, feel free. Regards. —


 * My concern is that a reader won't understand what "4 kB RAM (2114 x 8) 16 kB ROM (6364 x 2)" means and that there is not anything in the body of the article that will help them figure it out and it is not obvious from the ref what the numbers in these parentheticals refer to. ~Kvng (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Understood. And, as you've been editing Wikipedia for 2 or 3 years more than I, and are doing great work, this is just my opinion, not a lecture. 😁 Things "not being obvious" or the chance that a reader "won't understand" are really not good reasons to remove content such as this from the encyclopedia. The WP:STATUSQUO standard we have really addresses this.  The idea is to not remove information that may be valid, useful and sourced - just not complete.  If an editor is really concerned, in my case, I've felt the best thing to do is to expand upon the lacking data or idea.  If too busy/lazy, there's also the cop-out Template:Expand where one asks someone else to do the work.  Also, before reverting/removing valid sourced data, one should go to the talk page (although it does take effort) at least as a courtesy to the editor and the project at large.  Again, just option here based on my own years at this and the general consensus that has been formed over this period.  Editors do have their own varying ideas.


 * Anyway, as to this article's infobox, as stated, I've done changes that may make things clearer. One can't simplify all subjects to a child-like level though, as many articles such as quantum physics, molecular biology & IPv6 packet headers would not be possible here.  Regards. —