This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
On the mainpage the {{primarysources|date=August 2011}} template is added, which is absolutely correct but seen the nature of the page this seems appropiate to me. The page just refers to tech-specs of the products and then the details provided by the vendor are -imho- a good source. If any (quality) claim/statement would be mentioned an external -independant- reference would be needed, but just sourcing tech-specs of products should rely on the info provided by the vendor.
Being tagged with {{primarysources}} is a way of questioning the notability of an article as well as an attempt to have in dependent references provided that are verifiable. This is a core tenet of WP. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:42, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point is that a major product line like this there should have been ample coverage in the trade press. For example, saying a product is discontinued at some unspecified time tells me nothing. Eventually every product is discontinued. Independent coverage would fill in details like if a product was discontinued quickly because of customer problems, or not being competetive, etc. while the company web site just silently drops the page. This all needs to be added, instead of trying to just replicate the catalog at some point in time. Often primary sources from a major public company are well vetted so are reasonaly "reliable", so no need to remove them; just add others to get the full picture. Please be patient, it might take a while. W Nowicki (talk) 03:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
someone put the disputed tag after the statement that the PC5500 has built in hdmi interface for stacking. this is standard on all 5500 switches and this range doesnt require special stacking modules.
this is in the standard product description so would like to know what part is disputed.
tge person who added that tag please contact me or discuss here. Tonkie (talk) 23:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You should be able to look at the history and figure out who it was. Not that it is wrong, just a bit misleading I think. Anyway, the HDMI that we have an article about is about High-Definition Multimedia Interface which sends audio and video to monitors etc. It is not an Ethernet stacking signal (at ten gigabits, at least). I know earlier stacking cables were physically CX4 running a signal that was the Broadcom extended XAUI (with a special keying). Probably those cables were too bulky (and expensive?) so they switched to using the smaller and cheaper HDMI connectors still carrying XAUI? Maybe special cables too with HDMI connectors, or maybe standard HDMI cables work fine over this short distance. Or is this another definition of HDMI? We just need to clarify which it is, and not give the impression it is, say, a connection to a monitor. W Nowicki (talk) 17:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I took out the tag and tried to explain what I think is going on from the only source I could find, the user guide. I am curious where the info about Broadcom vs. Marvell switching fabric comes from, along with discontinue status. Also will work on a few more independent sources to get rid of the "primary" complaint. W Nowicki (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rebranding of all network products to Dell Networking[edit]
Dell has decided to re-brand their networking products (PowerConnect and Force10toDell Networking. Nearly all current Powerconnect models will keep their current name/numbering. Due to this many of the Dell references used in this article (technical specification etc) have a new URL. To address the re-branding and new URL's for the existing portfolio I will merge the content of the articles on F10 and PCT to Dell Networking page and use there the new URL's.
Once this 'merging, checking or URL's and updating' is completed I will remove this page and redirect to Dell Networking (or change the content to only address the legacy switches). Anyone feeling the urge to assist me on this: please do. Also feel free to discuss this with me via my talk page to avoid doing double work. Thanks, Tonkie (talk) 19:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 2 external links on Dell PowerConnect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
