User talk:Soluvo

__NOINDEX__ You are welcome to leave messages here.

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

2020-02 RDNA
Please do not create a new article for RDNA 2, in the same way that there is not separate article for Graphics Core Next 2 and Maxwell 2. In my own opinion. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I can understand your argument. But have a look at this:


 * The GPU microarchitectures of Nvidia have their own articles:
 * Maxwell (microarchitecture) (2014)
 * Pascal (microarchitecture) (2016)
 * Turing (microarchitecture) (2018)
 * Ampere (microarchitecture) (exp. 2020)
 * Hopper (microarchitecture)
 * see also: Category:Nvidia microarchitectures


 * The CPU microarchitectures of AMD have their own articles:
 * Zen (microarchitecture) (2017)
 * Zen+ (2018)
 * Zen 2 (2019)
 * see also: Category:Advanced Micro Devices microarchitectures


 * The CPU microarchitectures of Intel have their own articles:
 * Skylake (microarchitecture) (2015)
 * Kaby Lake (2016)
 * Coffee Lake (2017)
 * Whiskey Lake (microarchitecture) (2018)
 * Cascade Lake (microarchitecture) (2019)
 * Ice Lake (microprocessor) (2019)
 * see also: Category:Intel microarchitectures


 * Given this context, it can also be argued that RDNA 1 and RDNA 2 should be separated into two articles. As you can see here, there will also be "RDNA 3", which would have its article at RDNA 3. --Soluvo (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * « The GPU microarchitectures of Nvidia have their own articles » →‎ Indeed, but there is not Maxwell 1 and Maxwell 2 articles.
 * « The CPU microarchitectures of AMD have their own articles » →‎ Indeed, but there could be only 1 Zen article, such in frwiki with Zen+ and Zen 2 sections.
 * « Given this context, it can also be argued that RDNA 1 and RDNA 2 should be separated into two articles. » →‎ Of course. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 14:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * If we look at the previous GPU microarchitectures by AMD, namely TeraScale (microarchitecture) and Graphics Core Next, we can see that the multiple versions of these microarchitectures (e.g. GCN1, GCN2, etc.) are all in the same article. Therefore I think, as of now, we can do the same with RDNA (microarchitecture) and put RDNA1, RDNA2, etc. all in the same article. But if there was more information available we could also separate the articles into smaller ones for each version. --Soluvo (talk) 12:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Some baklava for you: AMD

 * Thank you for the baklava! I noticed that you also contributed a lot to articles on AMD topics. Do you think that there are any topics related to AMD that are currently not sufficiently covered in Wikipedia? --Soluvo (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I tried to improve a bit the AMD software pages, this is not a work for a single person and there is a lot to be done still, with regards to updates, fixing inaccuracies, improving the overall quality... I don't think that there is any topic that has no coverage at all, but while hardware generally is OK, AMD software is still in a really dire state. Responsibility is huge on AMD for not communicating better about its software... Maxorazon (talk) 22:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You're right, there is definitely room for improvement for AMD in terms of their software. I noticed you already worked on the article AMD Radeon Software. Thank you for that. Two other articles that we as a community should improve are AGESA and AMD Platform Security Processor. Btw I already tried to start a small iniative on improving AMD articles, see here: Talk:Advanced Micro Devices. --Soluvo (talk) 23:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * True, nice catch on these two articles. I got interested in the subject at some point, migh revisit it on wikipedia. An area that I just noticed is terribly bad is the general discovery about AMD GPU products, reporting on the AMD talk page or editing directly. Is CDNA that different from RDNA?--Maxorazon (talk) 02:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * What do you think we can do to improve the discoverability of AMD GPU products? Maybe we should get in touch with a community manager at AMD? I noticed your other post on Reddit here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AyyMD/comments/saxpd8/you_fuckers_should_spend_less_time_jerkin_off_and/. It's a very good idea to encourage other people to contribute to Wikipedia articles on AMD. Even though this Reddit post has a score of ca. 130 votes, I think people might take it more seriously if the wording was a little bit more "neutral". --Soluvo (talk) 23:38, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Reaching out to a community manager is certainly a great idea! I don't really know how to improve said discoverability much further yet, did not spend time thinking on it. I thought that this was the right language for ayymd, but coming up with a constructed post about the wiki amd project on r/amd could be successful? I have had talks there about the documentation subject too. There is the ROCm repo in previous link, but also a dedicated ROCm doc repo. Maxorazon (talk) 10:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Regarding contacting AMD: I did some research and found a community manager at AMD that I think we can contact. I can give you this person's name and contact details, if that's ok for you. Would you be willing to contact them via email? Regarding improving discoverability: We should analyze which infoboxes, style elements and other methods are used in Nvidia's and Intel's Wikipedia articles that make them more discoverable. Then we should add these elements to AMD articles as well. What do you think about that? --Soluvo (talk) 20:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, this can work! I am a bit busy, with the debian packaging and work next month, but good ideas! Maxorazon (talk) 09:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Very nice! When reaching out to AMD's community manager, do you already know what to ask them? Because I think it might come off as a little bit strange if we do not carefully consider how they can help us. For example which specific things they need to do in order to help us improve the AMD articles. What we definitely don't want them to do is to manipulate Wikipedia in any way. --Soluvo (talk) 21:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ATI vs. ATi "confusion" turned into a "mess"
Hi, unfortunately, In the "self-dispute" you made a completely wrong conclusion from the otherwise-correct data by -incorrectly- presuming things do not change in time.

ATI as a company, never used "ATI" to identify itself. It was "Array Technologies Inc." while "ATi" was their logo and brand name and was used in products as a shorthand So there was no "ATI Wonder" but there was "ATi Wonder" but at same there was no "ATi Radeon 8500" while there was only "ATI Radeon 8500". As the GPU age came (i.e. the concept of a "GPU" came to be), the company eventually re-branded as ATI Technologies Inc. withn a shorthand of "ATI", from the original "Array Technologies Inc." with a shorthand of ATi while retaining the logo. I very much remember this as at the time this was actualy a topic with some "old ATi" fans sticking to the original spelling for some time. Eventually, the all-uppercase spelling took over and, in 2006, in either case, it was the correct one both for products and the company.

In future, if something seems strange, please tone down your presumptuousness a bit and consider that it may be not that "the world is wrong" but that you just may not be aware of some things. Especially when thinking of descriptions of the past where those who wrote them may no longer be around to correct you anymore. This is how false history is written. Basically.

I may yet waste a week fixing this, but not sure. Not "my problem" to be frank. Just writing here for now, so you can reflect a bit for your future endeavours. Take care. 83.240.61.90 (talk) 15:58, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)