Talk:TempleOS

Determine if this OS is the product of a deranged mind, or an incredible trolling attempt.

Having seen the gassed thread on Something Awful and looked at various screenshots, one has to wonder if this OS is even a serious attempt or simply a pisstake at the insanity that some fundamentalist suffer from. For example, he steadfastly refused to include a standard VESA driver, and is schizophrenic. Can research be done into the matter? This is someone who has called their own psychologist an idiot, and more to the point, the lovely n-bomb.

Perhaps its the ravings of a madman, but if that were the case, I would have expected Involuntary commitment to have occurred by now and for his OS to have vanished. 76.125.252.80 (talk) 04:43, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

There appears to be ample evidence that T. Davis suffers from ranting on about all manner of things, using colourful langugue. However temple os is a serious project, with 100,000 lines of code (including a 22,000 line complier) which leaves little doubt as to T. Davis's technical ability and dedication (since he did it all himself ?) Unfortunately Davis appears to have no intention of his OS doing anything more than a commadore 64 and hasn't included any useful features a true modern OS would have (such as networking and hardware support). The whole God thing is weird, but just a little insanity rather than anything else. (Repeated use of the N-word suggests that he might be racist?) Aguyintobooks (talk) 23:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC).

Looking at his explanation http://www.templeos.org/Wb/Home/Web/TAD/Racism.html#l1, it seems he's using the N-word more for shock than to be racist. What's going on in his head may be a different matter though BiggRanger 20:43, 10 Feb 2016 (EST)

I have spend a lot of time going through the source code for this project, this is a complete functioning open source operating system with a compiler, games, and many additional tools. This is not a trolling attempt. BiggRanger 20:41, 10 Feb 2016 (EST).

Maybe it really is divinely inspired. OakMiner (talk) 03:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Rather it is yet another who think a second tree and mushrooms/LSD have something to do with The Deity. 06:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Devote9000 (talk)

Outsider Art?

Would this fall under the definition of outsider art? Peppercats (talk) 03:50, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't think so, according to the broadly accepted definition "include certain self-taught or naïve art makers who were never institutionalized" TempleOS would not fall under outsider art since according to Terry's website, he has a bachelor's in Computer System Engineering from ASU [1] BiggRanger (talk) 02:13, 18 Oct 2016 (UTC)

It's the definition of outsider art.--184.63.159.28 (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Network Code

As described you have full access to all computer memory and interrupts, including the addresses of Serial Ports and handling of Interrupts to be used as a NULL modem connected to a for example another PC running Linux. It sure has network support therefore, Terry however is concerned about privacy and wants his operating system to be perfect. Remember the good old days you set a jumper for a DMA memory address and an interrupt for your Serial Port? Sure TempleOS has Network support. It is very easy to connect to the internet with it too. But it is experimental and done by other developers who consider TempleOS, I know this sounds strange, a religion to free them of Microsoft and Linux/BSD/Unix has grown around Terry his operating system, like Microsoft once was considered to reliefe of IBM, Terry might say words like people with Gille La Tourette Syndrome, but everybody knows Terry doesn't hate black people but uses the N word to point to bad people. Until now successfully 56k6 datatransfer has been reached by extracting ARSTECHNICA its frontpage into standard A-Z text. People concerned about privacy like his Operating System since it is so small it can be screened easily. Above his Operating System other code of a user can run. Terry basicly created the base of an Operating System that can be easily checked for code and still is extensible with own code. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.152.162.69 (talk) 18:05, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

There are no network drivers for any network cards included in TempleOS or on his website. TempleOS does not even have a TCP/IP stack. There exists code on his website to enable and use the serial ports on the host PC, and data transfer is possible using serial ports. Can you provide evidence that "Sure TempleOS has Network support. It is very easy to connect to the internet with it too." is true/possible? BiggRanger (talk) 02:21, 18 Oct 2016 (UTC)

TCP over RS-232 in TempleOS, along with a package manager: https://github.com/minexew/Shrine Wfr (talk) 04:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

HolyC - elaboration

Who created HolyC? Is Terry A. Davis the sole developer of it?

Yes he devoted the last years of his life to it. The development took so much of him. Actually the more he became hooked onto days of programming with Red Bull and Coffee, now and then a short sleep, the more he acted different. It's a tragedy. Worked himself to death?

31.21.23.175 (talk) 10:59, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

What??? He's not dead, and HolyC was developed early on in TempleOS by Terry alone. Also he's not a coffee and Red Bull drinker, he prefers some store brand diet cola. Plus he has some weird 48 hour sleep cycle where he sleeps 16 hours. BiggRanger (talk) 01:20, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

MISSING: Terrence Andrew Davis, Terry A. Davis

At the day of the 6th month of the year 2017 at day 6th, at 6 O'Clock Terry is missing. It is impossible to detect where he is. All his accounts have been terminated on all websites, Youtube, Twix, Usenet, Internet, his personal Website. His previously website as of that date does no longer belong to a person named Terry A. Davis. We ask you polite to help us with information if you know where Terry is. Since all his accounts are banned, and all code of TempleOS has been erased.

Terry A Davis, see Wikipedia for TempleOS seems to have gone missing. We are very worried. Are you able to provide more information? His website has been hijacked, the WHOIS information suddenly changed. Terry A Davis started go missing a few days ago, at this moment only harassment videos on Youtube can be found. His former website TempleOs.org seems to be modified behind Terry his normal behaviour (from his point of view). Also all source code has vanished, something Terry would never do. Please help us and let us know if you can help investigate what happened to Terra A Davis. We are very worried. It makes no logic Terry would destroy all the source code and replace it with that he is just a monkey.

We have contacted his neighbourhood in Las Vegas, State of Nevada.

Please respond, if you can help. 31.21.23.175 (talk) 10:58, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Terry is not missing (he's still living with his parents), he stated in a video that he is becoming more like a monk and needed to get rid of a lot of things. His behavior has changed a lot, I believe it may be because he became a popular target of trolls from 4chan. I have in my possession almost every youtube video from his 3 channels, and mirror of templeos.org from May 15th, 2017. I will work on re-hosting these soon (he has stated that all his videos are 100% public domain). BiggRanger (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

As of week up to 19th Sept 2017, he's homeless, living in a car. He was briefly hospitalized. His parents threw him out. 81.154.125.203 (talk) 23:25, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Can confirm he is evicted, still living in his car as of date posted. CaptainGummyBearz (talk) 23:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Added link to archive.org since Terry has deleted TempleOS from his website.

Terry has removed almost everything TempleOS related from his web page, I've added a link under External Links (at the bottom of the Wiki) to an archive of his whole website and operating system on Archive.org, I'm just wondering if we should also put a link to the archive under the link of his official web site? BiggRanger (talk) 02:58, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Photographs of Terry

TempleOS.org (archive, because it changes regularly) has pictures of Terry listed under a gallery labelled as "Download free, public domain images". Image 1, Image 2 Could these be included in the article? --Inops (talk) 10:49, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Is there any warrant to creating a Terry Davis page?

Reportedly, (according to facebook friends of his), he has died, and he had built up quite a following of people interested in him and his behavior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnch18 (talk • contribs) 03:48, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

As an anonymous fan of Terry, it breaks my heart that he does not have a Wikipedia page. Please consider it a possibility. I can understand not everyone gets to have a Wikipedia page, but Terry was a seriously skilled programmer in many ways. Linus Torvalds gets his own Wikipedia page for creating a kernel, admittingly one of the worlds most popular ones. But Terry did that, created a compiler to go with it along with his own programming language, built an entire OS with that and to boot he did it all by himself. I'm skipping so many things to stay brief. Please grant me and many other Terry fans some solace in knowing that the man at least gets to have his own Wikipedia page. 85.150.220.198 (talk) 04:47, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

He can't have his own article until his life has been substantially written about. See WP:BASIC.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2018

There is no proof of his death. Until further news and details about what supposedly happened, it shouldn't be even mentioned. The part stating: "Davis died on August 30, 2018 in an apparent hiking accident" should be simply removed. Templar88 (talk) 10:14, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Until someone add it with a reliable source. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:05, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

His family confirmed his death on Facebook, but the posts are restricted to those who have them added as "friends".--Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

As of Sep 2 the official website for TempleOS has been changed to state "In the wake of Terry A. Davis' passing his family has requested supporters of his donate to 'organizations working to ease the pain and suffering caused by mental illness'..." It seems official information will not be available to the press until some time after the Sep 3 holiday. Derek M (talk) 03:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Message has been removed from the site as of Sep 3. Derek M (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

As of Sep 4, the website has been changed to a link to the official TempleOS IRC channel and the phrase "Rest in peace!" Derek M (talk) 21:56, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Terry's public Facebook page has been changed to "Remembering Terry A. Davis.

https://www.facebook.com/people/Terry-A-Davis/100025903548224 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.41.119.255 (talk) 14:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

That Facebook account is proven to be fake and created by the twitter user "TheTemple". As for the "remembering", anyone can ask to memorialize an account. This is the real one: https://www.facebook.com/terrence.a.davis1 (archive link)Templar88 (talk) 15:58, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Yet, if you click on his actual account (that you linked) on the friend Therese Davis (apparently married a brother of his), you will see this photo which states "Their deaths were unrelated other then all part of our family and passed on in August", with Terry A Davis being pictured in the lower left quadrant. So it seems his death is actually confirmed. Henk Poley (talk) 06:41, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Those posts on Facebook don't meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable sources and since multiple edits have been made against the consensus reached on this Talk page I have requested the protection to be increased temporarily even further. Derek M (talk) 06:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

You do as you want, just pointing out the data. I've long learned to not edit controversial pages. Henk Poley (talk) 06:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Apparently this memorial profile page linked by (39.41.119.255) was his newer profile. It is also befriended with Therese Davis (and other Davis'es). Henk Poley (talk) 06:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

As I've already said (but no one seems to be reading), the memorialized account IS FAKE. You can read this article about the imposter.Templar88 (talk) 15:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Templar88: Link doesn't work for me. Derek M (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Derek M: Does this alternative domain work? https://archive.is/SMNEB (note the change from .fo to .is). If the archive still doesn't work, this is the non-archived article.Templar88 (talk) 16:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Templar88: The alternative domain did not work for me either, but the non-archived article did. The source is a bit questionable but I think it is getting us closer to the truth. It doesn't explain the full story though, such as his official website being changed to state he passed away and then reverting. Derek M (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

• This is a highly unusual subject. Screenshots can be faked and family members can be fooled into believing their relatives are deceased. Best we can do right now is maybe add Template:Recent death presumed to the article. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 14:58, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

The TempleOS site says he is dead. Fairly sure, now, that he is 100% dead. Belsima (talk) 00:18, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 2 September 2018

"Terry Andrew Davis" to "Terrence Andrew Davis". Thanks.Ilovetopaint (talk) 14:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC) Ilovetopaint (talk) 14:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mz7 (talk) 20:11, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@Mz7: http://archive.is/ADCxL Ilovetopaint (talk) 12:27, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Mz7: It's true. His full name is actually "Terrence Andrew Davis", even though he commonly used Terry Davis. This is a transcript from his University where it cleary states the full name.Templar88 (talk) 15:50, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ilovetopaint: Nearly every source refers to him as Terry, and since Terry is not notable enough for his own article (currently; this could change) we should just use Terry according to WP:NICKUSE. Derek M (talk) 16:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Derek M: Then for coherence it should be "Terry A. Davis" and maybe in parentheses specificy his full name. Templar88 (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Per, MOS:FULLNAME, he should be introduced by his full name since 1) the article is secondarily about him 2) he has no dedicated article for himself. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ilovetopaint: Thank you for clarifying. Derek M (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Okay we seem to have a consensus — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@MSGJ: I'm sorry but I think we have had a miscommunication. When I said I agreed with Ilovetopaint (talk) that "he should be introduced by his full name" I had thought we were agreeing to change "Terry A. Davis" to "Terrance 'Terry' A. Davis." The presumption is that Terry is a common nickname for Terrance; a quick Google search reveals that, yes it is used, but I had never heard of it, so I'm not sure if it's common in general. Secondly, every source in TempleOS refers to the creator as "Terry" and never "Terrance," so it's bound to cause confusion. Finally, no citation was added to the article for "Terrance" so it's bound to get changed back sometime in the future by a user thinking it's a typo. Derek M (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Terry Melcher, Terry Gilliam, and Terry Pratchet ... It's pretty well known that "Terry" is short for "Terrence". --Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough, disregard. Derek M (talk) 21:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 4 September 2018

Change "born December 15 1969" to "December 15, 1969 - August 11, 2018" Terry A. Davis passed away in a train accident on August 11th, 2018 in The Dalles, Oregon. MrJojo (talk) 20:01, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Terry has passed away...

The reporter Neita Cecil from TheDallesChronicles was telephonically contacted and confirmed that the victim of this accident was Terry A. Davis. Another confirmation came from the police officer Jamie Carrico. See: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/terry-a-davis-terrence-andrew-davis.325/page-82 or https://archive.fo/5ewOR Templar88 (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Templar88: I would be very wary of using kiwifarms (a user forum) as a WP:RELIABLE source Derek M (talk) 21:34, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

His death has now been confirmed by TempleOS.org. Retroity (talk) 22:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Derek M: I agree, but soon after I personally received an email from The Dalles police department stating the same thing. Here's a screencap. I'm aware that it's not a reliable source still. A rumor suggested that TheDallesChronicles may write a follow-up article about the accident, and perhaps that would hold to the standards.Templar88 (talk) 10:08, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 4 September 2018

1. Remove reference 7 (unreliable YouTube video). The information was already verified in the next citation (reference 8).
2. Add to lead: (December 15, 1969 – August 2018)
3. "Davis describes" => "Davis described"
4. "Davis proclaimed" => "Davis was a former atheist who proclaimed" (sourced below, was reverted)
5. Add <ref name="VICE"/> ref after "single audio voice."

--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

References

Terry A. Davis section

@Chrissymad and Smuckola: I would like to see the reasons for removing a short biography section on Terry A. Davis. The appeals to WP:N and WP:RS are not valid: WP:N deals with notability of an article, not its content, see WP:NNC, and the source [2] (biography from Vice (magazine)) is reliable enough to be used elsewhere in this article. --M5 (talk) 21:00, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@M5: I did not revert your changes, but I believe WP:N was mistakenly used as justification when it should have been WP:OFFTOPIC. The article should be primarily related to the operating system, not its creator. Information on the creator can be given if it directly pertains to the subject of the article. For example, Davis's schizophrenia is mentioned in the article, but in doing so it gives background on the subject. From looking at one fact that you contributed, for example, the fact that Davis has an engineering degree is irrelevant for the topic of TempleOS. Derek M (talk) 21:15, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Featured article NeXT has a section NeXT#Background which starts with description of Steve Jobs' work in SuperMicro division and success of its products. Another bio section from featured article: Halkett boat#Peter Halkett tells about an ancestry, interests and career of the inventor. So the inclusion of the short section with relevant parts of the founder/inventor/developer biography is totally appropriate by the standards of the featured content. And engineering degree of Davis is as relevant for the topic of TempleOS as Steve Jobs' work in SuperMicro to NeXT or Peter Halkett's ancestry and Navy rank to Halkett boat. --M5 (talk) 21:53, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Well you make a strong argument, especially in my opinion the Halkett boat example. I would be in favor of your new section (not your other changes), and in fact, I think we could add even more to that section once the other users you pinged responded and once we find the relevant citations, such as: 1. Davis frequently used a program on TempleOS to generate random parts of the bible, and published these lists of words on his website and on Facebook. 2. He eventually stopped taking his medication and wandered around like a "monk" (his words if I remember correctly) and uploaded videos where he rants about finding a location with good "energy." 3. On this Talk page there is an arrest warrant for him. 4. He went missing at one point and his family posted online asking for help. Derek M (talk) 22:24, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry but this is totally wrong. It is preposterous to take this article which is WP:N only by the scantest of all possible standards and has absolutely no chance at being a featured article, and compare it to a featured article about some of the most notable and world-changing stuff ever to exist. And to compare the background of Steve Jobs to this guy. If it wasn't for that preposterousness, there would still be WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS which is not at all how we gauge encyclopedic merit. If you want to say that it doesn't trip WP:NNC then I'll cite the link mentioned within the WP:NNC section, which is WP:UNDUE. A whole biography section is undue weight, because all the relevant stuff is already in the article — and very succinctly and poignantly interspersed. The guy's biography does not in any way connect to the notability of the article's subject. As @Derek M: so eloquently said above, it is also WP:OFFTOPIC and all his given reasons serve to demonstrate why it would be WP:UNDUE. But then in a later comment, Derek M goes off the rails and contradicts everything he already said with "once we find the relevant citations". No I'm sorry but you won't find the relevant citations as the only citations relevant to an encyclopedia are from a WP:RS whereas you're talking about facebook and other self-published sources WP:SPS. And that's aside from the fact that the content you're talking about is WP:TRIVIA to begin with. I don't mean to take a contrarian or negative tone but everything stated in the last two comments here flies in the face of encyclopedic merit and twists all requisite standards into a WP:POV or WP:FANCRUFT (see wikia.com). And you guys seriously know better. :) — Smuckola(talk) 08:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

To WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS claims I'd say that WP:Some stuff exists for a reason, and the featured content in most cases reflects community consensus. On WP:UNDUE claims and comparison to Jobs: if Peter Halkett section in boat article or Jobs background section in NeXT have due weight in the respective articles, then Terry Davis section would have a due weight in this article because: 1) Davis has the same relation to his creation as Hackett and Jobs to theirs and 2) the relevance of Davis' biography details to the TempleOS is supported by reliable sources: both Vice and TechRepublic pieces (which are two main sources for most of this article) show the relation of Terry Davis' biography and personality to the OS he's created ("Neutrality requires that each article... fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources" WP:DUE). --M5 (talk) 10:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

You've twisted my argument from using his Facebook posts as evidence of what Davis used the OS for into an "off the rails" argument that Facebook is a reliable source. It is quite simply untrue that I made that point. I mentioned Facebook to use as a citation for him publishing lists of words from the bible, which is one of the main things he used the OS for. If you would actually read WP:SPS you would see that it is perfectly acceptable to use Davis's self-published Facebook posts as a source for this as proof that these posts happened so long as 1. the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim. - It's not. 2. It does not involve the claims about third parties - They don't, they're just lists of words. 3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source - It is undoubtedly relevant to the article what the operating system was even used for. 4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity - There isn't. 5. the article is not based primarily on such sources - Nope, since it would be just one sentence in the article. It would seem that the majority of your argument is that this bio section would present a non-neutral POV. However according to the Neutrality FAQ, neutrality should not be used as justification for outright removal of content, unlike more "serious" offenses like verifiability or reliability, and instead changes should be discussed in the Talk page on how to adjust the content's POV. So again, I disagree with your revert on POV grounds. And before making comments that we should know better, I'd like to remind you that some people can actually be new to this site and are still learning the relevant policies, which is difficult when much of what you link to as justification actually disagrees with your opinion upon closer reading. Maybe they actually do support your argument, but I personally did not understand the majority of your points, which looked like a policy bomb to me. I think you've successfully WP:POV_railroaded me out of this discussion, so I'll take my leave. I'll think twice next time before poking my head into a revert that was none of my business. Derek M (talk) 17:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

• So far no reasons for the urgency of removing the section were given, but there are some valid concerns for discussion. Therefore I'm going to reinstate the section and put a cleanup tag on it, until the concerns are resolved, as recommended by WP:PRESERVE. --M5 (talk) 11:00, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

As no consensus has been reached, M5 I'd advise you revert your actions as it goes against what most are saying here and you're likely to wind up at 3RR. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 11:03, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

No consensus has been reached for removing the section either. Reinstalling some content with a cleanup tag is a non-reverting compromise, not a revert, and it invites other users to contribute to the discussion. As for "most are saying" argument, User:Derek M supported reinstalling (with some conditions), User:Smuckola provided some arguments against the section, both were constructive. But your most constructive contribution to the discussion so far is your "Rst good" comment to otherwise silent revert. --M5 (talk) 11:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

HOPPY

Should the HOPPY operating system be mentioned in the former names? I've looked through a bit of the source and though not many, there's still a few lines of code that remain in TempleOS.

https://web.archive.org/web/20041017164256/http://www.simstructure.hare.com/OS.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20040704040043/http://www.simstructure.hare.com/HOPPY.ZIP 73.180.50.41 (talk) 15:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Maybe not as an alternative name, but an origin? Not able to boot the IMG though. 78.62.128.217 (talk) 15:28, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Although pretty different from TempleOS, the source code looks similar to J. I'm not really able to make any comparisons though since I can't get either past initial boot. I managed to start HOPPY in VirtualBox just by adding the .IMG to the first floppy drive. After starting it, I get to the point where it says "Drive A: Floppy and Drive B Floppy (Unsupported)". 73.180.50.41 (talk) 10:59, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Improvements and lead

@Ilovetopaint: Thanks for improving. One thing that's on my TODO list, in case you'd like to also help, is that the lead may be too long or include too many details (some material duplication between the lead and body rather than a proper summary of the body). Thanks again, —PaleoNeonate – 17:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't believe the lead is too long. There aren't any details I would remove other than maybe the "smartest programmer" remark and replacing the fan comments with something more general. The length is appropriate for the size of the article and mentions everything interesting, extraordinary, and notable about the subject (except for the expressions of racism that were inextricable to Davis' writings and personality).--Ilovetopaint (talk) 17:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Terry Davis 2000 (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:51, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Weaknesses of TemleOS regarding Functionality

The fact is there are major problems with this Operating System:

1. Nobody, except the creator, Terry Davis, writes in "Holy C." 2. There has NEVER been a single application written outside the original Operating System itself. No modern program can ever be added! 3. An obvious weakness is that this O/S cannot even access the Internet. 4. There is nothing that I have ever seen that indicates that this Operating System can print output to a Printer. 5. There is really no reason to write this Operating System for a 64 Bit Only Computer, it will never need more than 4 GB of RAM.

The article does not talk about the obvious question, "Why would someone put this as their main O/S on a computer?" It may be fun to play with inside the VB, not as a main O/S. For example regarding functionality of TempleOS: The functionality of my first computer 386sx 1 MB RAM 40 MB HD DOS 3.3 Win 3.1 Okidata 400 Laser, Megaword, a Bible Software, WordStar, First Choice, Excel 5.0, Word 2.0, Wolfenstein, (beats Frankie), is more Functional for a Business or Home User than TempleOS will ever be. User:Easeltine|Easeltine]] (talk) 14:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)Easeltine (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

And? This isn't a general discussion page about TempleOS. 2601:204:E780:D3B0:59B9:A458:6BAA:810B (talk) 20:50, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

The purpose of TempleOS is stated in the lead, an "operating system designed to be the Third Temple prophesied in the Bible". I don't know what's so hard to comprehend about this. JAYFAX (talk) 19:24, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

HolyC logo?

Why there is a a HolyC logo on this Article? But where is the source of this image. I don't think it's an 'Official' nor Fanart. Flankbed (talk) 13:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion as a trademark violation. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

See below. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• HolyC Logo.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• HolyC Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

TEMPLE OS hoodie addition

Links to merchandise have been added to the page. The seller is seedy and may be using this article to promote their business. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:8150:9CE0:E89F:6189:6432:E457 (talk) 13:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

May want to recommend protection

Lots of new unsigned edits / posts / talk stuff. If it dies down shouldn't be an issue but may want to nominate it at some point before people sperg out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiskeyFoxtrot7 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:TempleOS/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GeneralPoxter (talk · contribs) 20:05, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Review

• "It was programmed with an original variation of C (named HolyC) in place of BASIC..." The idea of HolyC being "in place of" BASIC is not pursued/elaborated anywhere else in the article.

• "TempleOS was released as J Operating System in 2005, as TempleOS in 2013, and was last updated in 2017. It was received with largely favorable reviews in tech communities and Davis amassed a small online following"

• I see no indication of "largely favorable reviews" in the source cited in the lead. Though the reviews mentioned in this article are positive, this is not sufficient proof that the OS "received mostly favorable reviews" unless this is a specific quote in a reliable source that I missed (if not, then this is WP:NOR).
• I am not saying that Mitton's review was unfavorable, but he still writes that TempleOS was "often regarded as something to be mocked, ignored, or forgotten" and recognizes that "There are many bad things to be said about TempleOS, many aspects of it that seem poorly constructed or wouldn't work in the 'real world'." However, no discussion of the OS's shortcomings is seen anywhere in Critical reception, nor in the article besides a quote from Davis saying that the OS has "no networking or Internet support". Surely this is a turn-off for some reviewers regarding the OS's functionality? (Admittedly, I have been trying to find some reviews that discuss in depth the "hate" towards TempleOS implied by Mitton, but turned up empty handed. At worst, I guess we can add some of Mitton's reservations to Critical reception)
• Even the claim of "a small online following" can only be loosely inferred from Cecil (though Cassel seems to be a better source for this), and needs further elaboration in the body of the article (e.g. talk about the live streams).

• More about the OS's release history (besides just the name changes) can be discussed in the article (not just in the lead).

• "TempleOS is a 64-bit, non-preemptive multi-tasking, multi-cored, public domain, open source, ring-0-only, single address space, non-networked, PC operating system for recreational programming." This one sentence is quite overwhelming from a stylistic standpoint. Possible to break this up a bit by moving some aspects out of this topic sentence and moving them into later sentences in this section? Follow up: In the cited source, this appears to be a quote lifted directly from Davis without attribution.

• "The operating system includes an original flight simulator, compiler, and kernel." Not sure why the flight simulator is listed before compiler and kernel (which are more important to the OS, functionally speaking)

• I heard that there was a plethora of interesting features in TempleOS besides the flight simulator already mentioned in the article. For example, I see that algorithmic composition is listed in the See also, but the music composing tool is not mentioned anywhere in the article. Maybe discuss in depth some other aspects from the features listed on the templeos.holyc.xyz website (Wikipedia won't let me link it here, but it appears when googling "templeos features"). Not sure if there are many sources out there that go in this deep though.

• Unsure if the example generated text is necessary here, especially given the lack of detail on other aspects of the OS (don't want to place too much emphasis on one game). Maybe mention more games?

• "for example, a file can have a spinning 3D model of a tank as a comment in source code" Is this level of detail necessary? It doesn't even appear to be mentioned in the source.

• There are more screenshots of TempleOS available on WikiMedia Commons. You can include some to better illustrate the article if you believe they are relevant.

• The working state of TempleOS is listed as "finished", but as far as I can tell from the article, "discontinued" is probably a better characterization. Do we have a source for whether the OS is considered finished (in that Davis, before his death, considered the OS complete)?

• Reference review: I have some concerns over Mitton (source 11) since this appears to be a blog. Then again, comprehensive reviews of TempleOS are hard to come by, and Mitton does seem to have the credentials. Since it's only used once, could you find a more reliable substitution?

An interesting read—there are issues regarding both broad coverage and neutrality in this article, but the addition of a few sentences/sources regarding the OS's history, features, and reception should probably suffice. Besides these points, the prose is well-written and the article is well-cited. Putting this on hold until July 30. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 21:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

It has been a week without any activity/response from the nominator, so I will be failing this nomination. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 03:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @GeneralPoxter sorry for not fixing it on time. I'll work on it and do a re-nomination after I've fixed the issues in your review. PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good! GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:24, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Fredrik Knudsen

After I reverted them, an IP added back some information which were sourced from the Fredrik Knudsen channel. @Johnuniq: had already reverted those information at a time where they were not sourced. @Dgpop: corrected the style of those information.
I am not really aware of the situation, so I ask for confirmation: is the Fredrik Knudsen channel considered reliable? And, are we facing an IP POV pusher? Veverve (talk) 17:42, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

No, YouTube is not a reliable source and Fredrik Knudsen is not a recognized authority on anything. I haven't examined the "mostly favorable reviews" claim but the IP should understand that there is no need to balance that because the situation is obvious—it doesn't need to be shoveled on. Also, the opinions of people with no understanding of programming bare metal are not relevant. For another example, consider Gamergate—try adding the views of random people from the internet there. Johnuniq (talk) 23:49, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Ok I will find all of the reliable sources which he has used for his video. You are wrong on every accord Veverve. You have shown no evidence or reference that the original edit is more reliable and if anything that is far more opinionated due to the lack of reference and incorrect information. It was not a well received project and I am simply outlining that TempleOS has objectively no point and the thousands of thousands of people on fourums and reddit reminded him of this on the daily. Your opinion holds no weight. To say that YouTube/Fredrick Knudsen is an unreliable source is also false, I doubt you have actually seen his content and his content is a completely neutral historical look at different events throughout histroy. I will be editing the page again to be factually accurate. If you wish to find references to support that there is indeed a use case and application then fine and THAT IT WAS MOSTLY POSITIVELY RECIEVED, but you will not find any. It was by all means a complete failure and this is the most widely supported opinion (not for no reason either). Gamergate is completely unrelated and makes you seem biased and stupid to mention that :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.188.218.18 (talk • contribs)

Hello IP. No need to be agressive right off the bat. Wikiepedia is not about WP:TRUTH, but about WP:Verifiability.

Why do you feel Fredrick Knudsen is a WP:RS? To me, the channel seems like any amateur video essay/documentary youtube channel. Again, it about being a RS, not being neutral.

I agree the agree that the source given did not say those reviews were mostly positive, and changed the paragraph accordingly. Veverve (talk) 09:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

YouTube is listed as unreliable (with certain exceptions that do not apply in this case) at WP:RSPYT. The point about Gamergate is that a million sources on the internet (including YouTube) say the opposite of what is in the Wikipedia article. Having one YouTube video that disagrees with this article is totally inconsequential. Johnuniq (talk) 11:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

IP, you have added information which cannot be found on the sources you provided. Veverve (talk) 13:46, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

So give an example as it can all be found on listed source (if you can read) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.235.29 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Failed verification

85.255.235.29 (talk · contribs) made this edit which introduced:

TempleOS received mixed reviews (Davis was a subject of Trolling due to his narcissism, personality, mental health issues and advertising on unhospitable internet forums). He would become easily enraged when people would fairly or unfairly criticise his work and therefore became a target on internet forums and Reddit which would cause him to be banned from multiple sites. Some of those were more patient with Terry Davis than others but due to the OS having no use case or application (for personal use past playing around/learning basic code or in any industry), he developed the Operating system largely of his own accord and mental illness .

References

That has three references (one of which is repeated):

1. https://tipsmake.com/a-programmer-writes-an-operating-system-to-communicate-with-god-through-computers
2. https://xperimentalhamid.com/os/linux/templeos-best-review-2020/
3. https://thenewstack.io/the-troubled-legacy-of-terry-davis-gods-lonely-programmer/

The first reference does not mention mixed or reviews or trolling or narcissism so it fails to verify the first sentence. Are the other references also inappropriately used? Johnuniq (talk) 10:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Johnuniq: This ref. does not claim he was trolled or became easily enraged, only that "Davis was banned from participating in many Reddit forums or Hackernews because of his schizophrenia and his religious obsession."

This ref. (which does not look like a RS at all, especially when looking at its main page) only has the following information which the IP added to the article: "TempleOS doesn’t really have any practical use, it can mostly be used to learn to program and to play around with. It also won’t work on any modern computers that have a UEFI." It does not state anything about others reviews being more patient with the OS. Veverve (talk) 11:07, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Yep, I noticed these problems as well. Information in an article should always match sources given, and avoid going into what is not covered, even if it's the truth. Eik Corell (talk) 11:13, 26 September 2021 (UTC)