Talk:D-Wave Two

Sources

There are few sources now in the article which are not (a) arXiv papers, (b) blog entries, or (c) press releases (whether or not reprinted in reliable sources). [no, I couldn't find a phrase for "press releases" beginning with "c".] In fact, D-Wave One was now found to have had 8 qbits, rather than 128 advertised in this article, whatever the source. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I am currently working through the article to remove bad sources and do general clean-up. The D-Wave One did have approximately 128 qubits, though. This is shown by reliable sources such as this Nature paper here. -Strongguy1 (talk) 15:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I now believe all sources to be reliable in this article. All sources are academic papers, official blogs, legitimate news sites, or legitimate company websites. Thus, I am removing the "unreliable sources" tag. If someone would like to dispute this then please let me know. --Strongguy1 (talk) 21:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Neutrality

Curious about the neutrality tag added here. Could someone provide an argument as to whether this article is biased for or against D-Wave? Otherwise I think we need to discuss removing this tag. --Strongguy1 (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I have heard nothing from anyone here supporting the neutrality tag being up. I will continue to refine this article, but for now I am taking the tag down. Any dissent is welcome. ~ Strongguy1 (talk) 15:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)