This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nbarth. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I'm calling you regarding something that I found very difficult to do: Reverting several (but not all) of your contributions to Server (computing) article on 15 February 2015. Now I am sure you did them in good faith and there was a lot of good ideas in your contributions, but the text was generally problematic: You had used aberrant forms of word and phrases all over the article. Strange word forms hide the meaning completely, rendering the article unreadable. MOS:COMPUTING § Collocation can help.
In addition, the lead should be a summary of the whole article, and devoid of both novel info and complications.
Please preview your own edits more often. I will read what you wrote again and will try to salvage parts of it.
I had a small group of college students read your version of the article and they said the problem was complexity, not so much as bad word forms. They said flooding the lead section with unnecessary jargons like "one-to-one", "one-to-many", "many-to-many", "backend", "microservice", "load balancing", "partitioning" and "sharding" was a bad idea. These need to be elaborated.
I tried reducing complexity and adding a picture too. Give it a read and tell me what you think. I could use your opinion. (Sure, I reverted you once but in general, you do good work.)
Thanks for the cleanup, and thanks for the thoughtful note!
Agreed, I put far too much terse detail into the lede. I don't believe that any of my usages were incorrect (I'm extremely careful with word usage, and spend a lot of my editing time on that), but agreed that it was jargon-heavy. Thanks for your cleanup; I'll have a shot at incorporating the content into appropriate sections.
A key concern for me is that the article's lede presented a narrow, 1970s-90s view of what a server is (a massive minicomputer serving many clients), without covering current practice (usually clusters of cheap computers, with very varied system architectures). I'll try to balance without complicating; feel free to edit yourself with our without consulting me, but I'm happy to work together!
A lot better! It has been a pleasure working with you. I made one or two correction but I don't insist on them.
By the way, if you don't mind, I remove {{citation needed}} above (which a third party has added) because it categorizes your talk page into the category of pages needing citations.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
