Talk:IBM Personal Computer XT/Archives/2021


Incorrectly placed Original research complaint date=July 2020

All but the very first paragraph of this article has cites. Calling any of it original research is, at best, mistaken, more likely vandalism and malicious abuse of Wikipedia's system. Incriminating evidence #1: There is nothing here noting what is considered by the vandal to be original research. If s/he did not know this is a very necessary part of claiming "original research", s/he should not be editing articles. Yes, I am remaining fairly anonymous because I have yet to have a positive interaction in these matters, and too often it is not resolved by the "moderators" or senior editors, or whatever their calling themselves. They certainly aren't pro-active, otherwise they'd be editting out the text marked "citation needed" which isn't done much. It's not unusual to see "cite needed" going back to the early 2000s here, because people feel no obligation to follow through. They're willing to pounce on a word or two over the "copyright material", though, which pretty much sums up their function here.

Requested move 4 August 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No such user (talk) 13:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)


IBM Personal Computer XTIBM Personal Computer/XT – IBM PC/XT (7.1M) has more results than IBM PC XT (6.3M) when you use Google. 85.153.226.225 (talk) 11:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:14, 4 August 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Bada Kaji (talk • श्रीमान् गम्भीर) 15:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Oppose The supposed preference for IBM PC/XT says nothing about a preference for IBM Personal Computer/XT. Note that one is abbreviated and the other written in full. I do not find the argument brought forth to support the request.Digital Brains (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Oppose IBM's "Technical Reference Manual" doesn't use a slash. (There used to be a picture somewhere around here,of the spine of the manual..) Plus spelling variants or decorative punctuation differences are not worth changing an article title. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.