Talk:IBM Lotus Word Pro

I got attached to Lotus AmiPro, and I still use it as my prefered word processor. Not many of us left, I guess. I enjoy writing macros to solve various word puzzles and problems. I appreciate that AmiPro data files can be read as ASCII. The newer word processors I tried just get me frustrated when the added features get in the way, and I can't control the formatting the way I want.

(Agree on the Ami-Pro love.) If anything, this article underrepresents the profound impact this first Windows-based word processor product had on the market. At that time, the dominant product was Word Perfect for DOS. Ami Pro of 1989 would still meet most people's needs for a word processor, and the limited return on further development in this product space reflects in the availability of free products such as OpenOffice and the IBM suite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.67.79 (talk) 20:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Word Pro.jpg
Image:Word Pro.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Outdated?
How can an historical article be outdated? Wouldn't a Battle of the Bulge article be outdated as well? Worse, the banner shows no link to any explanation. Such banners are silly. - KitchM (talk) 20:32, 16 November 2013 (UTC)