Talk:Expansion card

message: how are expanison cards supplied with power - is this dependent on the bus architectur (do buses contain a "power line") —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.64.80.66 (talk • contribs) 18:00, September 1, 2005  (UTC)
:They must do, and presumably two or more pins are reserved for this purpose - I cannot find any information on this subject. Several PCI-E graphics cards on the market now have a molex connector as well because they use so much power.--ChrisJMoor 13:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I stand corrected, the pin assignment of almost every backplane computer bus is available here (in the external links section of this article!). It is...mostly clear which pins are power supply/ground. Perhaps it should be mentioned that the physical bus connectors usually have power pins.--ChrisJMoor 14:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power to expansion cards? 

message: I have worked on older televisions, namely RCA consoles from the 1970s, and many of them featured a motherboard-like circuit board mounted to a metal chassis, with slots for vertical, plug-in modules.  The modular "cards" were single-sided boards.  Some of them had molex connectors for use in connecting to other areas of the set as well.  I haven't  worked on one of these sets in a while but if I do I will take some pictures and propose a writeup about it. Stovetopcookies 22:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television set plug-in cards 

message: Seems the history section misses to mention VAX, S/360, PDP, etc.. and other early computers that most likely proceeded the mentioned ones. Electron9 (talk) 09:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section incomplete? 

message: The article Expansion slots has been tagged for merge for nearly a year.  I suggest it would be useful to merge any unique content from that article to this, since it's difficult to talk about expansion cards without mentioning the slots they plug into. The slots article is short, fragmentary, and named in the plural which isn't customary for article titles. Any objections? --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Interestingly enough,  (singular) has redirected here since November 2004‎.   redirected here as well until 19 October 2011, when arguably a content fork  was created.  The merge suggestion tag went up less than a month later, on 13 November 2011.  We also have ‎List of computer bus interfaces and :Category:Motherboard expansion slot, which needs a "main article".  We also have ROM cartridge and RAM pack which are just external expansion cards enclosed in cartridges—they all connect using edge connectors.  I'll work on sorting it all out, I agree that content needs consolidated. – Wbm1058 (talk) 19:22, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

text: Then there is also Expansion bus.  An expansion card fills an expansion slot on an expansion bus.  It's easy to see how the same basic information could be duplicated in three places! Even more if there are "list of" busses/cards/slots articles. Wbm1058 (talk) 19:42, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: When I discovered that this page effectively functions as the lead for both expansion card and expansion bus I realized that the lead needed to be greatly expanded in order to do justice to both topics. 
The previous lead failed to adequately summarize the subject to begin with; it was way way short of an adequate summary of both topics taken together. 
I've almost certainly gone too far the other direction with my quick (but expansive) makeover. This should be trimmed and refactored by other editors as they see fit. 
However, I would like to say that streamlining the lead at the expense of covering expansion bus as a first-class topic is a step in the wrong direction. 
I'm normally a splitter myself, but in this case I can see these two subjects remaining in the same page. What should not happen, however, is that one or the other gets short shrift because of this conjoined status, out of some aesthetic about short, compact leads which underprioritizes thorough coverage. 
If we can't find a way to whip this lead into trim while continuing to cover both subjects in sufficient summary depth, then the expedient relief is to byte the bullet and segregate them into Harvard architecture (aka separate articles). 
My main goal in the expansion was to mention most of the adjacent considerations. In my own use of Wikipedia, I rarely arrive on a page such as this one wanting to read for ten minutes straight about "expansion card"; I'm usually here because I don't know the official name of an adjacent topic, and I'm merely trying to get my bearings to jump to into a meatier side-topic as soon as possible. 
While I didn't say this explicitly, between the lines I made it clear that expansion buses (and expansion interfaces) are also primary cultural artifacts within the computer industry with associated communities such as the electronic hobbyist movement. 
When I think about the bigger picture in this light, I suspect that in the long run expansion bus really does deserve it's own private i-cache. — MaxEnt 22:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I also added many images to the lead. On my portrait screen, they all fit alongside the lead nicely; in landscape mode not so much. I'm no great shakes at MediaWiki image layout, so anyone else feel free to mess with this until it's more attractive for more users. — MaxEnt 23:21, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hugely expanded lead