Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software/Archive 2

Home	Talk	Things to do	Sandbox

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Leaders?

We don't need "leaders" of a WikiProject of three people. Large WikiProjects like Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history have coordinators because of the size of the project, but one for a group of three is unnecessary. Please take out the leadership categories. Thank you, Metros (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Because I was hoping of more participants. Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so when you get to 700+ participants and several thousands articles (67,773 presently) like the history project has, coordination will probably be necessary. But with three users, or even several dozen users, there's no reason to have "leaders." Metros (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Let’s wait and see. Actually, there are about five, according to the Category: WikiProject Software participants. Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (talk) 18:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Wait for what? Unless 500 people join in the next couple of days, I see no reason to have leaders, especially one that was self-declared. Metros (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Free Software

I have added WikiProject Free Software to the list of sub-projects of this one. flaminglawyer^c 16:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

When you mean editors?

Does that mean everyone, or some select group of people? I don't really know the different type of users on Wikipedia (other than admins) ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 20:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Anyone who works on articles in Wikipedia in any capacity (except vandalizing them!) is called an editor. It makes us all equal! - Ahunt (talk) 20:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I'll be joining, the topics I work on sometimes involve software or websites, etc. Can someone add me to the table? I can't seem to get my name to show up (even though I feel I understand tables pretty well by now. Thanks. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 02:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Done! Welcome to the project - look forward to working with you! - Ahunt (talk) 11:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Add category:class:list

Should we? And if not, do I leave the class blank or do I classify it as n/a? Also, how do you classify something as not applicable (class)?ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 21:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Replacing chart

I'm going to go ahead and replace it with the software one if no one objects, feel free to revert it. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - , member of WikiProject Council. 15:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Does this WikiProject consist of doing anything other hundreds of edits to make the project page look pretty (and the subsequent constant requirement to fix the bad spelling and grammar that keeps getting added to the project page)? - Ahunt (talk) 15:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

No it has to do with doing the jobs listed on the main page, such as improving pages tagged with {{expert-subject|software}} and expending stub pages. Just see the main WikiProject Software page under Stuff to do for more details.

Thanks,
Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 09:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Unapproved editing of other project pages and implied hierarchy

I noticed that this project has been going around transcluding Wikipedia:WikiProject Software/parentage to various project pages, without consulting with any of the project members to do this, nor discussing the supposed organizational hierarchy, which is arguably flawed. This project was inactive for a long period of time and only recently someone has attempted a revival. While I do hope that something good comes of it, this project is still in its infancy compared to the more established computer-related projects and should not be editing unilaterally. Please discuss with other projects before attempting to redefine their own established organizational hierarchies. Ham Pastrami (talk) 20:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ham: I checked up on what you have said here and you are quite correct. That was User:Tyw7 and also the same editor working as User:81.86.68.253. I have to say that I am disappointed that this was done without consultation with the members of those projects. That isn't very collaborative or very democratic. Perhaps Tyw7 can explain this to us all?- Ahunt (talk) 20:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I organized the related WikiProjects this way because clearly Microsoft Operating system and other operating systems for that matter is a software and falls under the goals of WikiProject Software. The same applies to WikiProject Free Software. -- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 22:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the real question, for which we are interested in an answer, is why this was posted on the project pages of other WikiProjects without being discussed on their respective talk pages first? It comes over as looking like an "imposed decree from above", which isn't the case. - Ahunt (talk) 00:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Well it looks like this was removed from pretty much every other project page - still no explanation here of what the thinking was behind imposing this on other projects without discussion. - Ahunt (talk) 18:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I did it because the other WikiProjects were dead as well and clearly, those WikiProject are associated with WikiProject Software! -- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 19:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by "dead" - a quick look through the talk pages for those projects listed in your template shows that there is lots of recent discussion going on. - Ahunt (talk) 20:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't bother to check. In addition, WikiProject Malware is truly a "dead project", and it is related to WikiProject Software. Furthermore, it wasn't me who added WikiProject Free Software! Can that project be brought under WikiProject Software? -- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 20:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I foresee a great deal of pain if you'd attempt that without much artful convincing. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 03:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

we have two acting leaders?

See:

User (T C)	Rank	Duties	Comments	Status
Sammy9990 (T C)	Previous Leader	Retired	Founder	-
Tyw7 (T C)	Current Leader		This user is on temporary leave	Semi-Active
Deblopper (T C)	Acting Leader	Ask Me... For HELP !!!	Managing the Contents to meet Wiki Standerd	Active
Arijit rim (T C)	Contributor			Semi - Active
TinuCherian  (T  C)	Acting Leader; Assistant Leader; Coordinator	Contributor, Assessment		Active

ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 04:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a good question to ask. Since we are discussing "leadership", I would also add to this question: why does this project need a leader? That may seem obvious, but I don't think so. I belong to two other, much larger WikiProjects, Wikipedia:WikiProject Userboxes and Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft. These projects have hundreds of members and no designated leaders. Instead they are run through discussion and collaboration and this approach works very well. This project, on the other hand is not being run very well at all. (See issue above for one example)

Given the evidence that at least some WikiProjects with no designated leaders work very well and at least this one, with leader(s), isn't working well, can someone explain what the advantage of leaders is? Also, how did the current leadership get chosen and what is the term of office (six months, one year?) or was it strictly self-appointed? How and when are new leaders selected? - Ahunt (talk) 11:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops ! I didnt know I was made a leader...:) Btw instead of the new name leader, Co-ordinator should be a more appropriate term like in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Christianity/Coordinators , Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators etc -- Tinu Cherian - 11:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment I would think that the reason the current project fails as you feel it does Ahunt compared to some of the others without leaders and some working with leaders is that beyond asking for help, there really isn't much of a centralized leadership, as this project is more or less come as you go, and every member has great independence in how much/where they contribute (not that I'm advocating otherwise, since I feel that it inevitably cannot be any different at the current membership level we are at). It is, according to my understanding of what you said, already "leaderless." We're just hanging in between the two somewhere right now. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 16:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I am still waiting for an answer to my questions posed above: how did the current leadership get chosen and what is the term of office (six months, one year?) or was it strictly self-appointed? How and when are new leaders selected? - Ahunt (talk) 23:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

After digging through history, they were put there by a 81.something something something IP person, more commonly known as tyw7, so they were appointed by the leader, not self appointed, if that answers your question, although yes, I agree, I'd like some insight to the leadership process. Deb was assistant/acting leader before Tyw7 left for temporary leave, so I'm assuming he/she is the legitimate acting leader for now (although there also is the consideration that tyw7 wanted tinucherian to be the acting leader, but it is impossible to tell if it was a mistake or on purpose). I'm troubled by how tyw7 decided to make someone else a acting leader without noticing there was already one (or if that is not the case, which judging by the recent reply on talk which makes me feel it isn't anymore, why it remains unresolved). ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 03:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You can hold an election for the new leader. I stepped in when the project was inactive and tried to rebuild the project. Now that I can see that the project has grown and developed, it deserve an elected leader. -- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 21:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Software/Archive_2#Leaders? for relevant discussion in the past. Metros (talk) 21:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Well I see that discussion didn't go very far either. Since Tyw7 has indicated here that we can elect a new leader, I would like to suggest that we move to a different "leadership paradigm". I have never seen a WikiProject with a leader. Either they have no leader and collective consensus building instead, or a coordinator to ensure that issues are subject to consultation and consensus building. What does everyone else think? - Ahunt (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we need a review of the leadership system too, possibly change it to coordinators as Ahunt said. Although I can't really contribute much to it. Kinda busy in RL right now with school starting. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 21:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

If you make a change to the leadership system, I want to be one of the coordinators. -- Tyw7, leading new frontiers ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 11:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I rather figured to would want to nominate yourself for that. Okay, why don't we proceed then and see who else is interested in being coordinator. I suggest that we collect a list of names here of those interested and then have those who are not nominated choose a coordinator by discussion and consensus. - Ahunt (talk) 11:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't wanna comment on this, what-so-ever. Change what must be changed. I would appreciate whatever you people think about my rank, But just don't alter the other specifications - & I'll be happy. I really care less about rankings. I can do whatever I used to do even without the tag of "Coordinator" OR "Leader", so chill. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 17:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I have been trying to figure out what this project is all about ever since I was invited to join it. It is pretty obvious that it isn't mostly about improving articles. Anyway I finally figured it out. I have better things to do here on Wikipedia than be a member of a supporting cast for someone else's problem, so goodbye. - Ahunt (talk) 01:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

No, it isn't about barnstars or anything. I simply asked a barnstar because User Deblopper offered a barnstar to anyone who made a major contribution to the project. -- Tyw7, leading innovation ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 08:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't for the MAJOR contribution that you mentioned, It was for the making of category:vuze. I offered the barnstar myself, & by the way, the picture uploading wasn't a major contribution indeed. (I just hope there is any bot to find out the contributor list of any WikiProject, then I will never have to ask people to post me their contributions. I'm not feeling to program one, so if someone can find me out the bot (if exists) or make one, I will be really grateful to him).

And, Ahunt - ummm, not a great decision, but I liked the way you decide. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 16:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Integrated banner with {{WikiProject Computing}}

This project is a subset of the parent project WP:COMPUTING.This project articles contains both {{WikiProject Software}} and {{WikiProject Computing}} and possibly other descendant wikiproject banners also.

I am proposing the use of the integrated banner of {{WikiProject Computing}} , if there is a consensus among our project members...

Example :

{{WikiProject Computing|class=start|importance=Mid|software=yes|software-importance=low}}

will produce...

(removed)

• This project and its autonomy will remain the same...
• No pages have to be moved as a task force.

The advantages of this are :-

• Intergated banner which takes up less space and avoid clutter of different Computer related WikiProjects.
• Greater co-operation and co-ordination among computer related wikiProjects.
• Each WikiProject doesnt have to maintain an assessment department...Since the standards for WP 1.0 Assessment is same for all WikiProjects, single assessment is only required for all the computer related WikiProjects. This means more time for individual computer wikiprojects to help and improve the articles in their scope..
• Seperate stats for quality and importance for both parent and descendant projects ( as before)
• Catergory intersection of quality and importance available like Category:Amiga articles by quality and importance for WP:Amiga

Possible Actions:

• Replace {{WikiProject Software}} with {{WikiProject Computing}} and our project parameters in the article talk pages .
• Copy the importance in existing {{WikiProject Software}} to |software-importance= in {{WikiProject Computing}} banner.

Thoughts ?? -- Tinu Cherian - 10:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree - it will save talk page clutter! - Ahunt (talk) 11:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I have left a note of this discussion on the talk pages of all project members -- Tinu Cherian - 11:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It looks like it may be a good idea, but I would like to see what others' have to say. And in your example, how could a software article be more important to the computing project than to the software project? It's just I'm a little confused with having two separate ratings. I mean, why not just have a WikiProject Software template which you can have to rate the articles, since software is already a sub-project of computing? Althepal (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't really get the wording (supporting?!), and I agree with the concern on the rating contradiction issue, but a integrated template could work. I am also concerned that it would take more work to go back and review all of the computing templates (unless someone can write a bot). Lastly (comment), while autonomy is still there, I really don't see much resulting from adopting in this unless all the other projects related to subsections of computing areas agree to do so, because it'll create a situation where some are using the integrated, and some not, defeating the purpose. We only have around 70 articles, so it won't really change much.

Edit:Also, can someone fix the categories the templates use? We have overlapping ones (as of now anyway, see bottom). ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 21:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The categories overlaps was due to the presence of WP:Comp Sc banner that was on the top of this page which had a differnt rating, I removed it so that accurate categories from the new banner is visible. Please refresh this page, if needed , to see the changes visible. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Let me further explain : The seperate importance ratings are important and has the following advantages :

• More flexibility for both parent and descendant projects. ( greater independance and autonomy , I would say)
• An article might be of say Mid importance for Computing Project, Top Importance for WP:Comp Sc and even may be Low importance for WP:Databases. This helps such situations.

Please note that this initative is extended and in discussion with all the computer related Wikiprojects and there is more or less unanimous support now.

You may need not consider this banner integration as an overhead as I will make sure the present importance rating for this project is properly carried over to the new banner parameters during the banner intergation . I will make sure there is no or minimal overhead to the descendant project members for this banner intergation ( TinucherianBot is a hardworking Bot :) ). Whether or not the you may need to add importance rating to newer articles is left to the descendant WikiProject members.

This initiative is to reduce the Bureaucracy and administrative overhead on computer related WikiProjects and enhance greater collabration and cooperation.The result : you have more time to work on the articles of your interest. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

comment Would it be possible for a bot to auto-rate a unrated page as a stub if its rated as a stub on another project's template & has a stub tag (any) on the article? Also, I really don't see much bureaucracy reduced (at least, for me) cause I usually just add the most relevant project's tag to something instead of the the top general one/both. Still, it probably does remove some work. edit Still seeing a duplicate category (1 now, though, so some of them were removed.). Someone might have to modify the computing template. edit again I'm also wondering how the table on our articles would be affected, how would the bot in charge of updating it count 'software' articles? (as in does it count computing articles w/ the software=yes tag as both computing and software? I really have no idea, so just asking) ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

So far, its good. Feel Free to use it. Thanks to User:Tinucherian... We needed a Banner like this... (already had a invitation banner I think.)

I hereby request all the Wikipedia:WikiProject Software members to take a special care about the To Do list. Any one interested to make massive clean-ups are heartily welcome & reqested to leave me messege to my talk page of their work done. Deserving Contributors will be rewarded with BarnStars. Also If you feel like lack of somthing (anything) or think any major/minor modification is needed Or gotta plan that you aren't feeling free to discuss in talk page, can post me to my talk page too. Everyone's welcome, anythings welcome. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 17:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

????!!!! Is this referring to the integrated banner or something else? ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 21:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you can integrate all these in a banner, Hail you !!! (I think, you didn't get me, & ain't getting you [:(]) – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 18:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the importance should be change to priority. Ex: This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the priority scale. Illegal Operation (talk) 21:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

We may use Importance parameter to comply with WP1.0 guidelines as per the convention of most WPs . Anways it means the same whether we use name as priority or improtance. -- Tinu Cherian - 06:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe we have a consensus to have an intergated banner for WP:Software as per the above discussion. Thank you for all your participation and comments. I will be doing the replacement and intergation of the banner soon. -- Tinu Cherian - 06:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Banner Intergation of existing articles was completed . -- Tinu Cherian - 07:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to You, behalf of the whole team. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 02:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Currently I am tagging with {{WikiProject Computing|software=yes|software-importance=}} banner for articles under Category:Software stubs and Category:Software and its subcategeries with TinucherianBot . We have lots of work in improving these articles which falls under our project . -- Tinu Cherian - 08:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Announcement

Any members can use the WikiProject Software's Sandbox to try out new features to use in articles or to improve the WikiProject Software main page.
Thanks,
Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 21:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

WikiProject Malware is truly a "dead project", and it is related to WikiProject Software. Therefore, it should be brought under WikiProject Software. -- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 10:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

As a sub-section... – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 18:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

A sub-section sounds okay. But really, are malware articles so important? I mean, an article about malware may fall under WikiProject Software, but I don't think there is enough interest in all the various specific malicious software programs, nor do I think it'd be a good use of the project's resources to put any amount of focus into it. I'm thinking, that List of computer viruses, List of trojans (malware), List of spyware, and List of grayware (listing the most prominent malware), as well as the articles Computer virus, Trojan (malware), Spyware, and Grayware discussing them in general, could all fall under WikiProject Software and be the entire spectrum of malware articles (except where one particular malware program becomes exceptionally notable). Althepal (talk) 17:56, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

But, I think, they are more popular underground, than any other software article. Mostly because, any software (!= Malware) have a pretty good documentation in their company site's product page. But, these software havn't got any good place of documentation. For a novice, this could lead to difficulty for appropriate knowledge (to use or protect). So, start the articles within SubProjWiki:MalWare (if it sounds suitable) & I will thoroghly overview the whole. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 02:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I am Sephiroth storm, am I am trying to revive WikiProject Malware. I would like the chance to try to make this work. I have no issue with WikiProject Malware being a desendant of WikiProject Software. You also have to take into factor that not all Malware is Software. 90% or more, but not 100%. In any case, I welcome feedback. I am in the proccess of contacting old members, and hopefully someone has enough experience to take the Project once it is on its feet.

Thank You,

Sephiroth storm (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Techically ya, Malware is not pruely a subset of Software but I dont see any issues WP:Malware being a descendant of WP:Software. I will add support for WP:Malware in our intergated banner of {{WikiProject Computing}}. We could use {{WikiProject Computing|malware=yes}} -- Tinu Cherian - 04:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with that, hopefully we can get some assistance from WP:Software. Can you get that banner to mention WP:MALW somehow? Something to the effect of:

{{WikiProject Computing|class=start|importance=Mid|software=yes|software-importance=low}}

Sephiroth storm (talk) 10:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

 Working : Working on this -- Tinu Cherian - 12:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done : You may use as {{WikiProject Computing|malware=yes|malware-importance=}}
{{WikiProject Computing|class=Start|malware=yes|malware-importance=High}} -- Tinu Cherian - 12:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I look forward to working with WP: Computing. :D

Sephiroth storm (talk) 13:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

On an descendant WP tree, i think WP:Malware also can consider Computer and Information Security task force also as a parent WikiProject -- Tinu Cherian - 14:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

How about as descedents of WikiProject Software and WikiProject Computing. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 14:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll make those changes now. Sephiroth storm (talk) 14:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

New Leadership Organization

I propose a new organization for this WikiProject:

The position will be abolished. Replaced by 6 Coordinators and 8 scouts (to look for new articles needing updating)

Full Organization:

• 6 Coordinators (no leader)
  • 8 Scouts (to look for new articles needing updating)
  • Rest of the participants (members)

Thanks -- Tyw7, leading innovation ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 13:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

If I may, several questions spring to mind:

1. What are a coordinator's duties? (Couldn't find a mention on the main WikiProject page.)
2. How are they elected?
3. Isn't 6 too many given the fairly low activity around here? (Granted, I'm judging from this page's history; recent at least.)
4. How are scouts appointed? Under what criteria?
5. Should scout be a position at all? Sounds to me rather like a job that anyone can voluntarily elect to perform.

Regards, Миша13 17:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I feel like the scout number is a bit high, although the coordinator one could be appropriate depending on the roles. I'm currently working on founding a club at my school, so sorry for the lack of activity.ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The duty of the coordinator, judging from other WikiProjects is to manage the project for better efficiency. Scouts are permanent members whos duties are only to look for new articles and tidy up the todo list. Regarding your other questions, this discussion is exactly for working out technical details brought up by members just like you. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 20:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Then scouts are definitely too many in my opinion, the bot added plenty by itself, and any member can add them. Perhaps change name and also give them the task of updating article class/importance (new rankings and occasional updates if it improves).ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 20:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

If you have any other ideas for the organization of this WikiProject, feel free to post your suggested organization here. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 09:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Why is the project page so wide as to have to have a horizontal scroll?

Just wondering, it seems like it could be slightly narrower, and possibly have some parts condensed (or summarized) ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

This is just the size of your computer screen. On my 17" computer, there is no horizontal scroll, but when using from a computer with a 12" screen there is a horizontal scroll. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 20:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

But isn't that more resolution than screen size? Other than that, I don't know what resolution is the most common, so therefore I can't say if it is too wide or not.ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 19:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it is best to design the main page for the screen size of 12", the smallest screen size most users would have. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 09:40, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Software

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

WPFS

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge into Wikipedia:WikiProject Software/Free Software. -- 81.86.68.253 (talk) 13:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

---

Wikiproject: Free software is essentially a subset of articles that can be considered WP:S, so in being more concise, for some articles, it would be better to have their banner. However, they don't have a integrated banner (or do they?), so should I add both, or replace {{WP Computing}}? ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 20:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I think WikiProject Free Software and WikiProject Software should be merged since they are very similiar. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 10:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm don't know very well how the wikiprojects work, since I'm a bit new in this area of wikipedia, but I don't oppose a merge, and I think it makes sense to merge the projects, the only problem I see, is that some free software "fans" (it's the best word I got!) might not want to deal with "proprietary" stuff... and might want to have a "clean" wikiproject... But that's not a problem for me. SF007 (talk) 03:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion, they can't be merged. They can only cooperate, as both WikiProjects are a bit different. WikiProject Software usually deals with proprietary software (which makes up a significant amount of the software market) while WikiProject Free Software deals with open-source software.--Chenzw  Talk  11:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Free software is quite different than commercial software or software in general, free software has an educational propose, and we can’t miss this very important point (which triggers the generation of free software). so I think free software must be treated in a quite different manner with a different criteria for evaluation « PuTTY^SchOOL 19:05, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't completely oppose a merger, although I do think that, as mentioned above, the two are different and there should be some degree of separation between them, whether that is a separate project altogether or a workgroup within the Software WikiProject that is strictly for evaluation of free software. On a related note, where do the titles of software that are released in both open-source and proprietary versions currently fall under? Both WikiProjects? --Shruti14 ^{talk • sign} 21:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Banner doesn't look like it fits with the layout of the page

Perhaps use the same coloring/add a border and merge it into the template? Merely a aesthetic question. (also, I thought .svg's were the preferred file type?) ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 05:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I made a rough mock up of a alternative version here, I won't be pursuing this any further though as I'm sick atm, and don't know how to make .svg's. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 05:40, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Common Unix Printing System

Just a note to let the project know that Common Unix Printing System has been placed on hold following its GA Sweeps Review, whuch can be found here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

About software reception

Though generally reviews about a particular software should be included in the Wikipedia article, as far as I know, many non-featured software articles do not have reception section (e.g. XnView has been awarded by various sites, but until recently the article does not mention external reviews). I has been caring for this problem since one article I watch, XnView, was nominated for deletion last year, claiming it has no notability, but in fact it has high popularity. O&O Defrag, IZArc, and K-Lite Codec Pack all have similar situations. I think all project members should strive to search for information about software reception from independent computer books, magazines and websites to solve this serious problem. --RekishiEJ (talk) 13:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Backslash paper

Backslash paper has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Backslash paper. The deletion is proposed due to lack of notability. Thank you. Cybercobra (talk) 07:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)