Difference between revisions of "Milestone-Proposal talk:BASIC"

(Citation and general -- ~~~~: new section)
(Table for next time? -- ~~~~: new section)
Line 30: Line 30:
  
 
I second the comment of Dave. Also I agree with Lise, that the Citation does not reflect and does not explain the significance of this Milestone.
 
I second the comment of Dave. Also I agree with Lise, that the Citation does not reflect and does not explain the significance of this Milestone.
 +
 +
== Table for next time? -- [[User:Allisonmarsh|Allisonmarsh]] ([[User talk:Allisonmarsh|talk]]) 06:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC) ==
 +
 +
I am in general approval of the milestone, but thinks it needs finalization before being voted on by the HC.

Revision as of 06:13, 13 September 2019

-- Administrator4 (talk) 16:25, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

In order to avoid the passive voice, to add details, and clarify that BASIC is no longer the principal programming language used on microcomputers, here is a suggested edit for the citation:

Professors John G. Kemeny and Thomas E. Kurtz at Dartmouth College designed the Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code (BASIC) programming language between 1963 and 1964. The simplicity of BASIC's syntax, and the wide acceptance of its enhanced versions, made it useful in fields beyond science and mathematics –- an early instance of “accessible computing.” During the mid-1970s and 1980s, BASIC was the principal programming language used on early microcomputers.

Citation use of names -- Lise Johnston (talk) 21:47, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

It has generally been preferable to recognize the technical advancement without recognizing the individuals as the primary focus of milestone citations. The citation currently begins with the names of Professors John G. Kemeny and Thomas E. Kurtz at the beginning of the wording even before the achievement itself is enumerated. Consider revising the citation with that in mind. Maybe also describe what was special about BASIC in the plaque so the average viewing public who isn't familiar with it can better understand the significance of the achievement.

Incomplete application -- Lise Johnston (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Missing the section "What features set this work apart from similar achievements?"

Missing items -- Jason.k.hui (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

It appears this milestone proposal did not have any expert reviews performed nor the advocate's approval recorded in the discussion area. Also, the intended plaque site as noted in the proposal is still incorrect. Based on my last email exchange with the milestone proposer in early July, the plaque will be installed on the west side of the south facade of Collis, the building formerly called College Hall. The proposal still has Kemeny Hall listed with the wrong photo.

Jason Hui

History Committee Vice Chair & Milestone Subcommittee Chair

Re: Missing items -- Jbart64 (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Replace this text with your reply

I agree with Jason, we need the expert reviews. Generally, I am supportive of this milestone as it proceeds toward completion. Dave Bart

Citation and general -- JaninA (talk) 11:41, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

I second the comment of Dave. Also I agree with Lise, that the Citation does not reflect and does not explain the significance of this Milestone.

Table for next time? -- Allisonmarsh (talk) 06:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I am in general approval of the milestone, but thinks it needs finalization before being voted on by the HC.