Talk:Uzbl
all those maintenance templates
I've included some information from the german Version of the article. Now I think it can't be called a stub anymore so I removed the corresponding template. Also there is quite a bunch of references there so I also removed Template:Primary sources. (If somebody feels like there is still need for references I think there should be a more specific statement about that.)
What about the notability and the advertisment issue?--Wondigoma (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- So far (disregarding the anonymous postings), all you've established is that there's a program, and that its developers have talked a lot about it. Tedickey (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I am one of the many free software users in the world not related in any way with the developers looking always for alternatives and I find that this article should be kept here because of its value as an "authoritative" research start point.--Francisco Albani (talk) 03:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Two points: (a) Wikipedia is not a repository of knowledge, (b) Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Both are part of the guidelines. ymmv Tedickey (talk) 00:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Accepted into the Debian operating system
That's misleading (there are many packages, most of which are non-notable). Tedickey (talk) 14:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Alpha level programs
It's unlikely that there are any notable alpha level programs, simply because their user community consists mainly of the developers (who by the way contribute articles to various low-entry sites such as LWN). Tedickey (talk) 14:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Slashdot - an example of an unreliable source
Perhaps the topics to which Slashdot points contain reliable sources; Slashdot in itself consists of anonymous comments, which are inherently unreliable. Tedickey (talk) 14:11, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Notability
I just saw the notability warning. I'm not familiar with wikipedia guidelines (I don't even have an account) so I don't know if an article in an other language can be considered as a reliable source to establish notoriety.
If this is the case there is an article in GNU/Linux Magazine France n°125. You can see a preview here: http://www.ed-diamond.com/feuille_lmag125/index.html (pages 8 to 12). The article explain how to to use the software as well as some basic configuration file editing. The author is Carl Chenet. I'm obviously not in the best position to say that but after reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability I think it's a reliable secondary source (but it's in french). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.250.113.103 (talk) 00:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Great find! Will you add that link to external references? Or better yet, improve Uzbl with some words from that article?
- As for notability, I think this satisfies the requirements (source language does not matter); but we'll wait for what Tedickey says about this, as he added those warnings.
- -- MagV (talk) 12:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)