[Cuis-dev] Wikipedia Draft

[Ezequiel Birman]

Everyone seems to agree that the focus should be adjusted in producing a
text that passes wikipedians' scrutiny; but I also think that this won't
hinder our ability to write a reasonably good quality article.

I copy from my notes
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-dpVKQ7ojJfq49ftc5kvws605NJNN7bAlRwF2vz3Yn8/edit#heading=h.5wis6koroxd0>
things that I'd like to read:

> Cuis Variants and applications

Maybe there are more applications worth including, like Erudite, and the
Styled Text Editor.

Dr Geo

Cuis University

Haver

Arrows

LiveTyping

The Dynabook

What differentiates Cuis from other Smalltalk distributions?

Future plans

Release plan

Sponsorship

Image bootstrapping

Precompiled libraries


It would also be nice to find an excuse to cite Ingalls HOPL paper.

On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 at 13:12, ken.dickey--- via Cuis-dev <
cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:

> On 2024-02-06 04:09, H. Fernandes via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> > IMHO, your rewrite miss the needed neutral tone for a wikipedia
> > article. It may be rejected again. Btw, you completely discarded what I
> > wrote, trying my best to be neutral.
>
> Different viewpoint.  In your text, I saw no study or article supporting
> or quantifying "understandable by human".  I was worried that this
> statement is not neutral.
>
> The draft text tries to do this by "Cuis aspiration" with TheCuisBook
> referencing the aspiration.
>
> I like the "Reduction of complexity" sentence, but without comparison
> how would one demonstrate this?
>
> By base image Class count, Squeak is 4x larger than Cuis and Pharo is
> 3.5x larger than Squeak.
>
> Without numbers it would be like saying some engine company makes
> smaller engines, rather than specifying range of weight or horse power.
>
> I see that people are worried about this comparison.  You are the third
> person to point this out.
>
> Please suggest alternate text.  We can ask a reviewer when we submit,
> but good to make things best we can first.
>
> > The article should focus on what Cuis can offer and also make it
> > special, with detailled description. There is no much need to write
> > about the other Smalltalk and compare with other Smalltalk, this turns
> > the article as a marketing/evengelist writing. We can have this type of
> > content, but not in Wikipedia
>
> My blind spot.  I see several articles describing Smalltalks and want to
> ask "what is different?".  Perhaps the wrong question to address in this
> context.
>
> I will also try alternate text to be better.
>
> Thanks for the insight,
> -KenD
>
> --
> Cuis-dev mailing list
> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20240206/1d3ec1b6/attachment.htm>