I know that I may have mistakenly gotten rid of some actually useful information, which was a bad move on my part. I understand, and I am sincerely sorry for that. But first, could you explain why is the thermal design power rating of a northbridge useful?
The processors are definitely going to need some thermal design power ratings listed, but for a northbridge? There must be a reason, and I would like to know and understand why.
You added back the documentation link for most of the northbridges that I have edited, but it links to the entire set of devices that the northbridge is supposed to be paired with. Was the documentation link supposed to be a link to the northbridge's datasheet, or was it supposed to cover everything the northbridge was supposed to be paired with?
Also, the R51's link that points to its driver resource, is dead. At least, on my end. And I could compensate for my 'butchering' by adding a driver link for every ThinkPad's page I edit, if you wish.
I had also noticed that you shifted the docking solutions to the Miscellaneous subcategory, which in my opinion, looks out of place. I could just create a another subcategory dedicated for the docks, and maybe that would look better. Your thoughts?
Now, I believe I should tell you my reasons for editing and removing some of that information that you deem important. Most of it has some irrelevant pointers, such as the northbridges' documentation that points to everything that it is supposed to be paired with. What I thought was the northbridge itself, which is why I replaced them with the datasheet. I assume that we have a disagreement here, right?
There are a lot of things that needs to be done on my part, and I would definitely like to come with an agreement with you on everything I edit.
I took a longer look at your edit on the R51's page, and I tried to get the link to work, but to no avail. I have one simple question for you: what is the purpose of keeping links that are dead?
I also took some time to browse around your contributions, some of them which are directly related to how I remove 'useful' information. Especially, the edits involving User:SunCatalyst. While he does remove some actual bits that are useful and do definitely help people, I noticed that he tries to make things look proper and not messy with detail everywhere. Organized, in a different word. One demonstration of that consistency update he does, is the previous revision of the T30's page.
Removed images and all that, yes. But why re-add the images; what purpose do they serve? What kind of help can they give to other people browsing this site for help? All information, is not always necessarily useful and helpful. To get one example that you have displayed: the northbridge's thermal design power rating.
Are you a hardware designer by any chance? Because, that might be the reason why you found it 'useful', whereas I found it useless. There are too little uses I can find for thermal design power ratings, for a northbridge that is. The only helpful thing it will give to anyone, is just an estimation on how much heat it will dissipate in watts. Would there be any use of such a rating, especially on devices that do not produce as much heat as a processor would?
No hard feelings here, I am just rather interested in how you find these useful. From my perspective, I try to look at it from a person who would not have a clue on how it helps them.
- What do you have against information? Power consumption of chipset is good to know. I ponder computer systems, their power budget, how much I/O was squeezed into how much space and how much power does it take to operate. It is useful information to one who wants to build a battery pack, for estimating power needed. I disagree with your opinion: "The processors are definitely going to need some thermal design power ratings listed, but for a northbridge?". I think you are plain wrong, and loopy.
- Resource location, is useful information. Use your imagination. Imagine that, somebody has a personal stash/archive of old Web pages. I could ask that somebody, "Did you save a copy of this:old:explicit:resource?", and that somebody could say "yes" or "no". Resources presented with Template:IBMDOCURL are especially valuable, because they are named/numbered resources. Unlike URLs which can move and be "dead", those resources have an IBM Document ID, can be referenced regardless of path/location.
- I "fell in love" with IBM, because they provided much documentation and other supporting literature. Removing mention of their support resources, makes me sad. It is erasing a legacy. Regardless of how you or I feel, this is a public-access wiki, not a private scrapbook. You can delete whatever you please from your personal holding. All Content of this wiki was placed here by someone. Removing non-harmful content is not nice. --Numeric (talk) 19:59, 20 November 2018 (CET)