![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Home | Talk | Things to do | Sandbox |
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Lists of software ; I deprodded this because it's potentially useful, as an organized listing, unlike the category, but to be useful, it needs work. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
SimSig has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SimSig. The deletion is proposed due to lack of notability. Thank you. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, this page about a network software company is listed for AFD. It has a WikiProject Software notice on the talk page. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PathSolutions. The deletion is proposed due to lack of notability. Goldenrowley (talk) 05:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
So after a long period of consolidation, reworking and graft we've worked our way down to two basic infoboxen for the project: ((infobox software)) and ((infobox OS)). Based on the ((infobox)) meta-template, these have proven flexible enough for almost all of our articles... with the exception of a few Windows and Mac OS article, which use a couple of custom templates: ((infobox OS version)), which is sort of a sub-version of ((infobox OS)), and ((infobox Windows component)), which is sort of a custom software box for things which come with Windows.
Rather than just merging these, the first thing I did was try to update their base code and styling to match that of the main infoboxen, which both makes the project more consistent and helps with future work. Unfortunately, these changes have been repeatedly reverted by the templates' author, even after concessions were made to better mimic the old style.
So the basic questions are:
I've put up two comparisons to indicate the differences in styling, which show the current version of the forked templates, the proposed style updates, and a comparison to how the main infobox looks (although this will be missing a few fields, as they haven't been merged yet). The comparison for ((infobox OS version)) / ((infobox OS)) is here. The comparison for ((infobox Windows component)) / ((infobox software)) is here. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
I also posted this in the specific infobox's talk page, but... It seems to me that a key attribute of any Windows component is "what mode does it run in?" So this could have possible values of "kernel" or "user", of course. Just in case, "both" could be allowed. Jeh (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
So it's been over a month now and there's been no dissent. I'm flipping both these infobox templates back over to the updated style. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I have been editing/deleting a handful of software related articles lately and have determined there is a wide disparity in the notability of some software. Should we create guidelines for software notability? 16x9 (talk) 13:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion on the Joomla! talk page about linking to good examples of the software's use. Other editors may want to comment on the discussion. 16x9 (talk) 19:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Please update the announcement system to reflect the latest announcement! Also please do tasks in the Things to Do, some tasks have been listed there for months!!! Complete the task (updating mostly) and delete it from the list.-- Tyw7, Leading Innovations (Talk ● Contributions) 10:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi guys, what is this project's stance on extensive version histories for software articles? SeaMonkey#Release history, for example. At the videogames wikiproject's style guide we have "A list of every version/beta/patch of a game is inappropriate. Consider a summary of the game's development instead. " - based on WP:NOT. This example is obviously not a video game but does the Software Wikiproject agree? Marasmusine (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:41, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Replication Server was prodded for deletion. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
this area is wide open for creation of templates using current opensource software to demonstrate how to gather, store, and share knowledge. example: mindmapping. how to store personal interests in one location that will facilitate ease of use of software, and ability to retreive and share with others. looking forward to continued discussion on this possibility.Docentia (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
FYI, Ogg Media, the OGM article, has been nominated for deletion. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 08:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Norton Internet Security as Feature Article. Feel free to add your reviews here: Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Norton_Internet_Security/archive2 --Tyw7 (Talk ● Contributions) Leading Innovations >>> 10:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Wondering about standards for 'Comparison of type of software' articles, (i.e. Comparison of WAMPs, Comparison of browser synchronizers). These articles are regularly hit with the ((externallinks)) tag, but it seems that since they list multiple products, it seems natural to a have one link per product. Some comparisons use internal links where available, but it there seems to be a lower standard of notability to be included on these comparison tables - as many are products are listed that don't have their own wiki-article. I was thinking that perhaps the guideline should be to have one 'external link' allowed per product on these comparisons. Even for the products that have their own article, I imagine a web viewer upon viewing this comparison, might want to select a certain product for trial or download. Hope this starts some conversation.Cander0000 (talk) 15:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I've initiated an RfC concerning hierarchies and coordination of daugter projects at WikiProject Computing's talk page. I thought you all might wish to have a link to read the page and help gain a consensus that works for all. blurredpeace ☮ 11:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Software/List of software companies. Recently moved there per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jay/List of software companies. Thoughts on what to do with it? –xenotalk 15:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody update the WikiProject Software centralized announcement system Wikipedia:WikiProject_Software/Announcement-m. Include any useful or importnat events there. --Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions) 22:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
The reliability of Sys-Con as a source is being discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Sys-Con. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 04:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
s.h. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.44.153.208 (talk) 06:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Please list your name below using the template ((User|username to be replaced by your own username))
if you are actively participating in this WikiProject. Thank you. --Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions) 11:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
Could members of this WikiProject clarify what the accepted guidelines are for having articles on individual Linux commands? Thanks. MLauba (talk) 09:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps task forces for adobe and microsoft software should be created to help maintain certain articles.Smallman12q (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I've posted a suggestion in the 'Participants' discussions page. Please post your comment & commit the change if feasible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deblopper (talk • contribs) 18:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Clearly an article on software should not include promotional details like pricing. But what about in a history section? Are prices a non-encyclopedic detail, or useful information? The example I have in mind is at Ecco Pro but I found another at Rae Assist. Johnuniq (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Prices widely vary depending on how you get the product. It shouldn't be in the history section either way. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi
I found a video game that seems to be under the scope of your project. I can't find any other video games like that so it may be an error?
Talk:Sopwith_(computer_game) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NeoGenPT (talk • contribs) 22:55, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Windows Neptune (here) and Windows Odyssey (here) are up for deletion. Comments welcome. wjematherbigissue 19:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Essay_on_the_notability_of_software#RfC:_Should_this_notability_essay_be_promoted_to_the_status_of_a_guideline. Pcap ping 18:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
((helpme)) Can someone take a look a code of this project's main page? SOmething is breaking the sidebars. --Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 16:17, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Done fixed this my self. --Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
((adminhelp))
I see this weird message all over the project's main page: ?UNIQ77d749371f048a99-h-1--QINU? According to Sephiroth storm (talk · contribs) it has something to do with http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/QINU_fix. --Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
FYI, a whole bunch of rename requests popped up on WP:RM to rename open source to open-source, as happened to the main article open source software (a unilateral move to open-source software, now).
76.66.197.17 (talk) 04:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SitNGo Wizard.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I could use some un-biased editors to have a look at SitNGo Wizard, Poker and Stud poker. User:TonyTheTiger has been warned on the AfD page to disengage from editing the article do to his WP:COI as he was compensated to create the article. There appears to be consensus on that page that the article reads like an advertisement and that it should be deleted - yet TonyTheTiger is making no efforts to improve the article, instead he is reverting all of the good faith edits of other editors over and over and removing tags such as the 'issues' tag while making other edits (and not noting tag removal). He has also been warned not to revert the edits of other editors on that article until the AfD is completed, yet he continues to do so. Unfortunately it appears at this point as if me and him are the only two editors who care enough to make content changes and I do not want to engage in an edit war - so I would appreciate if one or more editors can have a look at [this version] that I would like preserved and the current version TonyTheTiger is insisting upon and decided which is better - or make changes of your own.
Regarding Poker and Stud poker a self-published blog is being used as a citation and I removed it. User:2005 instantly reverted my edits, as User:2005 does with the majority of my edits despite being warned to disengage from edit warring with me. I have just reverted the changes back but I am certain User:2005 will simply change my edits back again with a snide remark immediately. I do not want to take part in an edit war so I would like a ruling from another editor or editors on whether this should be included.
I am not canvassing, I am asking for people to objectively analyze these two articles. Whether you agree with User:2005, User:TonyTheTiger or myself is fine - I just want an outside opinion to avoid an edit war. Thank you DegenFarang (talk) 07:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
From WP:LISTNAME: "If (as is often the case), the list has multiple columns and so is in table form, the name or title List of Xs is still preferable to Table of Xs or Comparison of Xs".
There are many software articles that don't have any actual comparison. Much less any sourced comparison. As pointed out in January here, the columns are chosen by hand by WP editors and are original research, it is misleading to claim them as encyclopedic comparisons. I would like to form some consensus so those articles can be renamed to "list of...". Any "Comparison of..." article should contain mostly sourced comparisons. Articles with both a list and sourced comparisons could be a) split in 1 list and 1 comparison or b) left untouched in the "Comparison of..." title. --Enric Naval (talk) 10:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)