Talk:List of flashcard software

Educational Software Category
Think maybe this should go in Category:Educational software? ShelleyAdams (talk) 22:47, 10 October 2009 (UTC)ShelleyAdams


 * I agree. Will add to article. --New Thought (talk) 21:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Problems with article title
Present title is "List of Flashcard Software"; the capitalization is wrong (cf. List of word processors or List of professional wrestling terms) and I also don't think the wording is very precise. "List of digital flashcard review software" or something similar may be a better title. &mdash;Notyourbroom ( talk ) 02:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with the capitalisation issue, but not with the name change. --New Thought (talk) 13:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I suggest to change this page title to "List of spaced repetition software" or "List of spaced repetition flashcard software" or something similar. —04:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I was going to suggest adding a column for "supports spaced repetition." Not all flashcard programs support spaced repetition, so changing the page title might not be appropriate. -- 2 Oct, 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techgrrl (talk • contribs) 06:58, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Starting to have some concerns about this article...
This article seems to give free license for people to add any program or pet project they wish to, without any regard for notability whatsoever. My worry is that this could easily devolve into link-spam. In addition, Wikipedia is not a directory. Is there really any encyclopedic value in collecting a bunch of links to any old flash card program, whether it be a large commercial enterprise or an open-source powerhouse with thousands of users, or an iPhone app or someone's home-brew system with fewer than 100 users? See, e.g., List of word processors, which has extremely few external links. Virtually every program listed is wikilinked to an article on Wikipedia. &mdash;Notyourbroom ( talk ) 19:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Pruned. Feel free to remove any spam links added after this. Syrthiss (talk) 12:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Bravo! Perhaps I should be more WP:BOLD. &mdash;Bill Price(notyourbroom) 14:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * We will see if it lasts. Syrthiss (talk) 14:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm having a hard time seeing the distinction between the comprehensive list of flashcard software and the list of word processors. I don't think there's any reliable way of determining which software is "notable."  I'm not convinced that the existence of a Wikipedia article justifies "notability." Jeff Axelrod (talk) 04:05, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree - if there's some sort of standard or litmus test to determine what makes an app "notable," then by all means let's apply it, but I didn't see one when I looked through WP's notability guidelines. In lieu, Syrthiss or Notyourbroom, would you be willing to offer something more concrete than "long lists are bad?" --Jay (Histrion) (talk • contribs) 18:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The Spaced repetition page links here with the following words: "There are more than 250 flashcard-programs, most using some form of spaced repetition. The list of flashcard software provides a broader overview." It's somewhat diappointing to find only the pruned version of the list here. I've been looking for a comprehensive list so that I could look up files that I could potentially use with the software I chose (Parley from the KDE education bundle). The formats of the vocabulary files are often the same, or can be converted into one another easily, so I believe it makes sense to list even minor programs. I do not think that Wikipedia should avoid becoming a directory; I believe the "list of software" pages are just that! But maybe it would make sense to start a WikiDirectory instead.Anša (talk) 15:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks like the "tin-pot dictator" Syrthiss has ignored the above discussion and pruned again. Instead, let's open this discussion again with some measured consideration. The above use of the definition notability is actually incorrect, as it refers to whether a topic merits its own "article". The more appropriate rule here is content of the article. To quote the relevant sentence: "The notability guidelines do not apply to article or list content (with the exception that some lists restrict inclusion to notable items or people)." There is no reason that this list should restrict inclusion to notable items, for the above posters' reasons that they want to see a real list, not an amputated stump. Syrthiss's original reason for pruning was external links, which is fair enough, but instead of removing links he/she removes the whole entry.
 * Nevertheless the present article still opens itself to spammers, and no-one wants that. Can I suggest that we make the follow changes to both allow a legitimate and comprehensive list of Flash Card software and reduce the effectiveness of the spammers:
 * 
 *  Police the rule to disallow external links. To be fair we should disallow Wiki links as well as these articles are really nothing more than promotional articles anyway which happen to have "independent" reviews. Who would think any simplistic Flash Card software merits an Encyclopedia article anyway?
 *  Remove the Notes column, so people don't tell us about their "help garantee(sic)" or what the thing is written in or when the latest release was for God's sake.
 *  Instead have an agreed set of feature columns (license type, platforms, supports spaced repetition, supports images, audio etc, registration required, multi-sided etc) so people who are looking for this software can easily find what they are looking for, and also provides structure to limit the freedom to spam.


 * Unlike another I would like to see some consensus please before I go ahead and do this. In the meantime while we have the current "notability rule" I am going to remove RectoVerso because the linked Wiki article is about the definition of recto and verso, not the software.

March 2015
Why are some app names in red?

What is the meaning of the "Number of slides" column? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaynesin (talk • contribs) 20:35, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Indeed, I was wondering what was the meaning of the "Number of sides" column too. A small explanation would be interesting I think. I assume that's the number of ways you can see a card (e.g. if language A, language B and pronunciation appear on a card, any of these 3 fields may appear and you have to remember the 2 others.) If that is the case, I don't think the values currently populating this column are correct. Bonob (talk) 16:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

August 2010
An IP editor re-added the deleted material. I restored the cut-down version. Here's proof that the IP editor dug back into the article history to find the bloated version. &mdash;Bill Price (nyb) 03:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * edited &mdash;Bill Price (nyb) 03:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Online services?
There are a couple notable online flashcard websites that are much more notable than some of the software packages listed, that I believe should be listed here. In fact, the main "Flashcard" article that links to this page mentions "wide range of software (including open source and online services)".

The biggest flashcard website is Quizlet (http://quizlet.com), with over a million registered users and 2.5 million flashcard sets. Other popular services include http://flashcardexchange.com and http://studystack.com.

Not sure who wrote it but I agree with the point above, as client side software becomes less prominent compared to web platforms, the current format of the list means that Quizlet, Duolingo etc are being excluded despite being orders of magnitude more popular than most of the desktop based solutions here. Will think about ways to re-order this but would appreciate some thoughts Edu apps (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Notable?
What determines whether a particular application is "notable" in this context? I don't see anything in Wikipedia's notability guidelines on the topic, and sales figures can't be the criterion because some of the apps already listed are shareware or freeware. I have no dog in the fight; I'm just a little concerned that someone's deleting additions without justification, since the last two additions to the list have both been removed by the same person for reasons of "notability." I'm going to re-add CueCard, but with a request for some conversation about it. --Jay (Histrion) (talk • contribs) 17:52, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe the answer to this problem is to forget the whole article. FC apps are too easy to create and there's too many out there for it to make sense to list them in Wikipedia. Notability is unfair as it is reliant on pure chance that there are (very dubious) "third party" reviews for any particular one. There's nothing instructional about it, the info can be found by a Google search. The Notes column is useless, what interesting notes can there be about FC software really? That it's written in Python!? If the article is to survive, I think this column should be dropped so it just become a pure list only without this invitation for spiel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.227.202 (talk) 04:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Scheduling mechanisms
We have a mixed of spaced repetition and massed repetition applications in the article. It would be good to distinguish between the two and perhaps have some notes on the scheduling algorithm for spaced repetition software. &mdash;Bill Price (nyb) 03:47, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Adding new flashcard software
Why was my entry deleted? Why is it not possible to inform people about new flashcard software? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.38.11 (talk) 13:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Because this is not an exhaustive list. It's only a list of notable software. In virtually all cases, a new piece of software will not be notable. &mdash;Bill Price (nyb) 14:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Added FluxCards and Spaced Repetition
Hi, I just added FluxCards and a column "Spaced repetition". FluxCards got removed immediately by User:Notyourbroom together with a bunch of other flashcards programs that lack an own article.

Do people open a list to see 9 items or an overview of flashcard software??? Better go delete the other articles. I'm sure you can bring this list down to 4 items. I see these candidates for deletion: Cobocards, Cram_(software) and OpenCards that look like one man shows in their change history. Yet I'm sure there are about 50 relevant flashcard apps out there that deserve to be put into context here in this list.

Am I supposed to write an own article about FluxCards? Maybe yes but maybe you could consider items not having an article yet potentially relevant enough for this list and consider writing an article or just acknowledge that some things are better managed in a list, only as a simple flash cards app might not have enough to be talked about even if it was the best such app ever.

And yes, me being the author of FluxCards might not necessarily get you on my side but sorry, this list really could need some work but not in the form of simply deleting random items.

--Giszmo (talk) 22:59, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Flashcardexchange and Quizlet on Android
Flashcardexchange and Quizlet don't offer own apps on Android but for both there are good apps that fully sync with the flashcards. I guess that at least deserves a footnote somehow. --Giszmo (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Platforms: Add a column for Chrome OS?
Chrome OS is a rather new operating system made by Google. It is Linux-based but Linux application do not run on it, so it is quite special. It is selling more than Mac OS X, especially to schools (which are a big user of flashcard software), so I believe we should add a column for Chrome OS. Cheers! Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * In case horizontal space is a problem, how about removing the outdated Palm OS and J2ME columns? Nicolas1981 (talk) 04:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference for Brainscape
The reference for Brainscape is an URL to an Anki page that does not contain the word "Brainscape". Is it a mistake? Thanks! Syced (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Cram.com free
Cram.com is free to download in appstore/google play; same goes for web version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.76.140 (talk)

New platform rows added
I added 3 missing software rows in the platform section to keep both tables in sync and to document gaps in the second list. I filled out only a few cells (per their main articles); it would be great if a topic expert for these applications could check and include the missing values. GermanJoe (talk) 01:44, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Hopelessly incomplete, urgently needs fixing
I came to this article because I wanted to find some alternatives to Pauker, which I've been using for several years. I was shocked to see that Pauker isn't listed. I know it used to be. It should never have been removed.

In a "List" article, a case can be made to restrict the list to software which has some reasonable amount of users. There are legitimate concerns that Wikipedia might be used to advertise some ephemeral rubbish. But one should err on the side of inclusiveness, not exclusiveness. Pauker has been around a long time, and at least on Linux has users; it's packaged for the current and pending releases of Debian and Ubuntu, for example, unlike some of the software that is on the list.

A "List" article should inform readers about what is available. It should not be used by opinionated editors to restrict information by including only items they approve of.

I propose to reinstate Pauker to this list. I strongly suspect that there are other programs that should also be reinstated, but I don't know enough about them to do that myself. As remarked above, I came here to be informed. That is what Wikipedia is for, and I expect it to do better than this article currently does. Sayitclearly (talk) 15:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia has guidelines for such lists and content in general (see WP:CSC, WP:GNG and WP:V). If the software is truely notable, please feel free to write a draft about it based on independent reliable sources. Regarding your argument A "List" article should inform readers about what is available: an encyclopedia focusses on notable topics and information. Not everything that exists belongs here - developers of minor applications can promote their software on blogs, forums and software review sites. If you'd like to discuss the linked content guidelines or propose changes for them, please use the talkpages of the respective pages or a general forum such as WP:Village Pump. GermanJoe (talk) 16:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't have time to become a "Wikipedia lawyer" or to write drafts. I've pointed out why this article is not useful, but I'm not going to waste my time adding material which will surely get reverted by one of the aforementioned opinionated Wikipedians. I have no skin in this game - I came here to get information, not to give it. For less biased information, obviously I have to search elsewhere.Sayitclearly (talk) 19:13, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Federation of organisations/companies who develop flashcard software
Is there a federation that brings together all these organisations/companies who develop flashcard software? Thy SvenAERTS (talk) 08:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Add a column about the specific algorithm used
I think the first table should also have a column which lists which algorithm every software uses.

For example, Anki uses SM-2 and SuperMemo uses SM-17 (which is supposedly more efficient: ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.117.58.149 (talk) 13:23, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Memorion
I'm missing free Android App Memorion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DF:972C:2940:AC6C:C33B:CF26:D30A (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)