This is almost a fine example of a minimal-size article. However, it has a serious flaw: despite a vague allusion in its headline, this article gives no hint of why they've prohibited use of Windows 8, and without this information the whole item is baffling. Examination of the sources indicates the reason they have was that, having seem the problem created when Microsoft stopped security support for XP, they couldn't (they claimed) take the risk of depending on a foreign operating system again.
This is on the last ticks of the clock (I wish I'd been able to review it yesterday; but, that sometimes happens; the article was already aging when submitted). If we could get it fixed, resubmitted, and reviewed all within the next ten hours (and change), it might still reasonably be considered sufficiently fresh. The article doesn't appear to have any other difficulties; if not for the lack of "why", and the importance of that question to the story, I'd publish it now.
If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.
This is almost a fine example of a minimal-size article. However, it has a serious flaw: despite a vague allusion in its headline, this article gives no hint of why they've prohibited use of Windows 8, and without this information the whole item is baffling. Examination of the sources indicates the reason they have was that, having seem the problem created when Microsoft stopped security support for XP, they couldn't (they claimed) take the risk of depending on a foreign operating system again.
This is on the last ticks of the clock (I wish I'd been able to review it yesterday; but, that sometimes happens; the article was already aging when submitted). If we could get it fixed, resubmitted, and reviewed all within the next ten hours (and change), it might still reasonably be considered sufficiently fresh. The article doesn't appear to have any other difficulties; if not for the lack of "why", and the importance of that question to the story, I'd publish it now.
If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.
Of the changes since the previous review, a couple of passages were overly close to source, and one of those I had difficulty understanding (indeed, I had difficulty working out what the corresponding source passage meant, either).
Thanks to the reporter who made those changes; the earlier authors of the article are apparently students in Australia who, due to the timezone difference, likely wouldn't have gotten to it in time.
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
Of the changes since the previous review, a couple of passages were overly close to source, and one of those I had difficulty understanding (indeed, I had difficulty working out what the corresponding source passage meant, either).
Thanks to the reporter who made those changes; the earlier authors of the article are apparently students in Australia who, due to the timezone difference, likely wouldn't have gotten to it in time.
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
After reading the entire article, I have trouble understanding why they've banned Windows 8 usage. They mention that Windows XP is still supported in limited fashion but I couldn't understand the rest of their thoughts. Gryllida05:12, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Does our article come across as saying Microsoft still supports XP in any way at all? I don't think they do, although the statement Microsoft made about earlier versions was just a bit confusing. The Chinese haven't banned earlier systems, such as Windows 7 which Microsoft still supports.
The claim by China, that the ban is because of XP, is just that: a claim; we don't know for certain it's true, and it should be attributed to China. For example, perhaps China wants to encourage local businesses by having everything made locally, and they used the particular incident with XP as an excuse. That would make their claim, about XP being the reason for the ban, neither exactly true nor exactly false. --Pi zero (talk) 10:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
