Talk:Clipboard manager

List page

Why is there no page List of Clipboard managers with a feature table? There are enough clipboard managers out there to warrant it. - 111.193.178.136 (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Ditto! :-) 213.247.73.83 (talk) 08:36, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

External links

I think the external links are helpful. What's the wikipedia guideline on this? peterl 04:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:External links. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 04:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for clarification peterl 04:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I can confirm that they are helpful, because that's how I discovered the app that I am currently running. — ¾-10 20:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

A few other popular clipboard managers:

M8 Free Clipboard 500 Clips —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.50.140.155 (talk) 23:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

All these should be on the List of clipboard managers: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.247.73.83 (talk) 08:38, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

I have added them. ~Kvng (talk) 14:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

These additions are clearly against WP:EL, and add non-notable listcruft. Please provide atleast some kind of independent reliable sources to show that these products are noteworthy. GermanJoe (talk) 14:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@GermanJoe: I assume you're objecting to the external links directly in the table. As far as what entries should be allowed in the table, that's WP:LSC and doesn't necessarily require WP:GNG-style demonstration of notability. ~Kvng (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Kvng: Yes, regarding the external links. Regarding inclusion: common selection criteria are listed at WP:CSC (although the list is probably meant to be non-exclusive). Entries should have atleast some evidence of wider relevance - a self-published generic website is not sufficient to judge an entry's relevance (otherwise I could just code my own personal clipboard manager, create a small website, and promote it via Wikipedia). The list guideline notes: "Criteria for inclusion should factor in encyclopedic and topical relevance, not just verifiable existence." (I have the page watchlisted btw, but thank you for the ping). GermanJoe (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)