Talk:BB FlashBack

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on BB FlashBack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071102235405/http://www.itreviews.co.uk:80/software/s263.htm to http://www.itreviews.co.uk/software/s263.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:38, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

POV check Template (Point of View Check)
Regarding the POV check template I added today: The article reads like a press release or promotion for the product, although it is not too promotional (like some articles!). I suspect it was a good faith effort to provide information about the software that simply did not progress much beyond the initial effort. I am hoping someone with knowledge about this software might add additional--and more recent--information from reliable sources. Thanks! -  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)  15:52, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi there. I actually work for Blueberry Systems (which is the sister company of Blueberry Software). I use BB Flashback and it's counterparts on a regular basis. Am I permitted to update this article? Assuming POV as always ·martyx· tk ct gy 14:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


 * IMHO, yes it would be great if you worked on this article, particularly since you are an experienced Wikipedian. Sometimes we take WP:COI too far, e.g., assuming someone with a conflict cannot contribute anything to an article. You are being upfront about the potential for bias, which is good, and the proof is always in the pudding anyway. If the article comes across as biased, someone will change it, and if not, we have a better article. However, note that my opinion differs some from the official policy. So I suggest reviewing WP:COI and then decide. All the best  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)  17:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017
I've tidied up the article. Added Contents section. Added logo and screenshot. Moved and updated citations. I have not removed any of the existing content that was in the article yet - this is still WP:POV. I have also added other applications in the FlashBack family including their associated links. This is terrible WP:POV WP:COI but I couldn't think of any other way to include these :( I also need to find the relevant link to FBX as it's still in beta. Anyone please feel free to continue to clean up this article and make it more neutral! ·martyx· tk ct gy 12:29, 7 December 2017 (UTC)