Talk:Cygwin/X

Article Tone
The tone of this article is like an instruction manual or a FAQ page. The entire article needs a complete rewrite, as Wikipedia articles are not supposed to sound like manuals and FAQ pages. Sparsefarce 21:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Perhaps we could move much of the content to Wikibooks? -Hyad 03:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I was going to take a stab at rewriting this as an article instead of a getting started guide, but I there is just not a lot of content in the article right now. Beyond the first section, the rest of the article doesn't really explain a lot about what Cygwin/X actually is, and I'm not sure I can think of much to add that wouldn't involve more research than I care to do right now. On the surface, there really is not a lot to Cygwin/X. As the first paragraph says, it implements the X Window System, it is based on X.Org, and it is part of Cygwin. The relevant information on what it is can be found in articles about those three things. So unless someone wants to dig up some history of the project (Beyond the switch to XFree86 to X.Org - the mention of rootless support is just a feature which doesn't seem like a good place for it) or some other interesting tidbits about the specific project, I'm not sure it warrants much more than a mention in the relevant articles. TygerStripe 22:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Please rewrite.
This is not a good Wikipedia article. Things like smileys are not accepted (other then, of course, on pages discussig the use of smileys in text). This is as professional as any text found on any Counter-Strike board out there. An article here must be better than this. I would have done it myself if I had the technical knowledge. Other than that, I'd vote for this page's deletion.
 * Agreed. This sounds much like an advertisement for Cygwin.  WBHoenig 02:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto. This looks less like an encyclopedia and more like a howto guide. Should we transwiki this article to Wikibooks? --Toastr 23:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Can the warning notes be deleted?
At present (24 May 2007) there is no "how to" information in this article, but there is a note on the page saying that there is. It appears to me to be written in a perfectly formal tone, but there is a note on the page saying that it isn't. Despite the comment above there are no "smileys". Here on the discussion page is a note saying "This article may be too technical for a general audience", but there is nothing technical in the article. It seems to me that someone has deleted the offending material, but left the notes on the page referring to it. Is there any reason why these notes should not be removed? What is left is a very short article, giving only a brief summary of what Cygwin/X is, but I see no harm in that.

Cygwin X seems to be rejuvenated
The project appears to have re-started again, with an anouncment here: [], and some downloads as well. I will amend the article here unless someone says different. Eamacnaghten (talk) 16:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Screenshot?
The screenshot has been reduced in resolution due to copyright concerns. I notice that the screenshot of Xming is tagged that Microsoft permit screenshots of their software provided their copyright is acknowledged and has avoided this fate... 213.152.38.55 (talk) 12:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

confusion between Cygwin and Cygwin/X
The see-also tag appears to have been made by confusing Cygwin (comparable to MinGW) with the subproject Cygwin/X (which would be an appropriate see-also if MinGW were focused on X servers and applications) TEDickey (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2012 (UTC)