Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software/Archive 3

Home	Talk	Things to do	Sandbox

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Lists of software

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)

AfD nomination for SimSig

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)

The result of the Afd was No concensus. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination for PathSolutions

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)

Infobox discussion

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:

1. Is there a need to maintain separate templates for these articles?
2. If so, should their code and styling be updated to match the project's main templates?

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)

• The new version of {{infobox Windows component}} is more consistent with other templates. I see no reason to revert. Techmdrn (talk) 21:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Suggested new parameter for "Windows component" infobox: "mode"

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)

Update

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)

software notability

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)

I would think perhaps expanding NOTEWEB would be easier, although there is a lack of guidelines on many things. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 04:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, as long as a software has been reviewed or awarded by one of prestigious download sites, such as Softpedia, it deserves an independent Wikipedia article. --RekishiEJ (talk) 17:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Web is not about software but more web content. I also wouldnt agree with being reviewed or awarded by one prestigious download site. who/what makes it prestigious and does that equal "significant third part reliable sources" ? 16x9 (talk) 17:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Examples in article

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)

Coordinators' working group

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)

Updating

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)

what exactly do you want updated to the announcement system from this page? Is it the infobox part, or everything??? ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 16:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Anything that you think all members of WikiProject Software should know. I assume that all members have "installed" the announcement system on their talk page. Just look at the messages that I have posted on the anouncement system. In addition, remove tasks that have already been completed, unless they need to be further reviewed. Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 18:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm very busy with homework atm, so I will update this when I have the time to sort through what needs to be updated, my teacher decided to "grace" our class today with a project due tomorrow when I already have a test and another project due tomorrow. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 02:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Now you are free?-- User:Tyw7/Signature 11:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Updated with one notable announcement, I feel like the to-do list is overlapping with the category, perhaps write new instructions on what exactly fits the to-do list. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 22:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Version histories

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)

Article alerts

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 {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:41, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Any trouble setting this up?Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 04:17, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

SyBase Replication Server

Replication Server was prodded for deletion. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Demonstrate Benefits of Open Source Software

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)

Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate?—greenrd (talk) 14:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ogg Media

FYI, Ogg Media, the OGM article, has been nominated for deletion. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 08:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Norton Internet Security as Feature Article

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)

Comparison of type of software

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)

RfC started at WikiProject Computing

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. ^blurred_peace ☮ 11:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

List of software companies

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? –xeno^talk 15:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Suggest deleting it, in favor of Category:Software companies. To make a comprehensive list like that would be a huge page, and quite a bit or maintenance.Cander0000 (talk) 16:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest tagging all those companies with Category:Software companies. It would be quite tedious to list ALL of the companies. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 11:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The page has been listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Software/List_of_software_companies for deletion.Cander0000 (talk) 01:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Centralized Announcement System

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)

Sys-Con

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)

Page is to big win width

s.h. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.44.153.208 (talk) 06:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Active Members

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)

• Tyw7 (talk · contribs)

This might help as well - Wikipedia:WikiProject_Software/participants. Could we add a last active date or some field where individuals could indicate they are still involved - guessing your concern is that the list is stale. Cander0000 (talk) 01:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess we could. By the way can you also update the announcement to reflect the lastest announcement. Some users (me) use that to check the latest announcement and get the lastest information about the project. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 12:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

or... Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:User_WikiProject_Software - this would seem to be updated as folks opted in/out of the project, without having to come here and constantly update whether they were active or not. Trade-off is that there wouldn't be a way to display add'l information, such as areas of interest.Cander0000 (talk) 05:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea but i just want a quick roll call of who is present and active and who is not. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 06:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm here. Although I'm thinking that some sort of script that checks for last time log-in/activity, say once a day of all members on the page would be better. Now what was this thing on logo changes (aka why the heck are we changing it?) ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 00:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

About the logo, I have already worked with that out on your talk page. And do you know how to make that "script"? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 11:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Partprobe

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)

Adobe, Microsoft taskforces

Perhaps task forces for adobe and microsoft software should be created to help maintain certain articles.Smallman12q (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

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)

Prices

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)

Most inclusion of prices would be non-encyclopedic, unless there was something really notable about the pricing that was unique (i.e. first Widget software under $100), which could be included in a history section. Current pricing is probably more clearly found from the manufacturers website, which would likely be already linked.Cander0000 (talk) 05:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

game?

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)

Articles up for deletion

Windows Neptune (here) and Windows Odyssey (here) are up for deletion. Comments welcome. _wjemather^bigissue 19:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

RfC on new proposed guideline for software notability

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

{{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)

• All fixed. For some reason their were a few extra div tags in the top of the code, which ended the site's divs too. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 17:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
• Correction, give me 20 mins while I clean it up. It was more broken than I thought. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 17:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
•  Done Alright. All the frames are in line and not over running the toolbox. If you have another question, redo the helpme template. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 18:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Still messing with the toolbox (making them small) and title page. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Example: [1] --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

• Ah, I'm using the beta version, and it looks great. We'll have to find someone that isn't. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 18:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
• I sugest taking a look at WP:WikiProject Systems and taking a lead from them for your code. Best idea overall is to WP:KIS. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 19:18, 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)

Weird codes

{{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)

Formatting seems ok, as far as layout and whatnot - it's just section headings and templates. It's not the underlying pages, either - click to edit the section on goals, for example, and the code there looks normal. It's just not parsing as normal on the main page. Bizarre. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 18:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

• There doesn't seem to be anything an admin can do about it right now either. The problem is an intermittent bug in the wiki software. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 19:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The problem appears to have disappeared by itself. At Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#wiki project errors I wrote:

The UNIQ...QINU stuff currently on Wikipedia:WikiProject Software disappears if you remove {{Special:RecentChangesLinked/Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Software articles by quality log}} or replace it with a link to Special:RecentChangesLinked/Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Software articles by quality log.

I tested it with preview at the time. Each time the special page was trancluded there was "UNIQ..." in the preview and each time it was removed or replaced with a link, "UNIQ..." disappeared. I recall seeing the same problem with transcluding changes on a page long ago, maybe a year. I don't know the cause but maybe it can happen if there is something special in the transclusion. If you don't want the problem to return then consider replacing the transclusion with a link. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

"Open Souce X" -> "Open-source X"

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)

Topics moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Software

• I would like to propose an alternative to this mass-deletion of 'non-notable' software. Specifically, it seems like removing small, unsourced articles and making pages similar to Comparison of video editing software would allow users of WP searching for a particular type of software a place to find it without having an unsourced stub for every GNU/open source/commercial piece of software that exists. --Matthew K (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
  • !voting Merge to such articles is always an option (though not all classes of software lend themselves to such table-based comparisons). --Cybercobra (talk) 07:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
    • This isn't the best venue to discuss such a topic. WP:WikiProject Computing or WP:WikiProject Software are probably better fora. Many of the "Comparison of ..." software articles however fail WP:OR (specifically WP:SYNT) being written from primary sources, with the comparison table columns chosen by some Wikipedia editor(s). This may influence the reader one way or the other based on the amount of green or red, even if those columns aren't considered a criteria for comparison by some WP:RS. Software that's not included in some roundup review or similar in a secondary source doesn't belong in those articles either. Pcap ping 14:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SitNGo Wizard

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)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

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)

Trying to head-off edit warring

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)

renaming all "comparison of..." to "list of..."

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)