Talk:Website wireframe

Open Source / Freeware Wireframe Tools
Does anyone know of any good free software tools for creating wireframe diagrams? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.9.25 (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Linkfarm
The Website Wireframing Tools section should be removed per WP:SPAM, WP:EL, and WP:NOT --Ronz 20:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Removed. --Ronz (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * While the Software section may have shown signs of partially encyclopaedic use, I don't think it's going to be possible to prevent it from just being a spam magnet. I've removed it. --gilgongo (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool Wireframe Template
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.236.8.30 (talk) 18:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Removed probable spam links
I've been a UX designer for the past 10 years and have never heard of Mockingbird, OverSite, ProtoShare or Justinmind. I've therefore slimmed down the list of wireframing tools to a more encyclopaedic list of the acknowledged tools. --gilgongo (talk) 17:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite
I think Pleaseleez's rewrite has been a big improvement, so thanks for that. Is there anything else that could use work here?

One thing I think could become clearer would be the two aspects to wireframes. Designers and UI coders use the page layouts as illustrated by the Balsamiq image. User experience and information architects also use wireframes that show navigation paths between pages. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:05, 26 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. I am going to make an edit within the next few weeks so I can incorporate your suggestions. Pleaseleez (talk) 16:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Notability of software
It would be wise to give a reference that cites how the software mentioned is used to create website wireframes. This will ensure that the software is notable enough to be included in the encyclopaedia.--Hm2k (talk) 15:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

You can find sources here: You should find references in a similar way, otherwise entries may be removed. --Hm2k (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Agree, but the copy referenced is largely marketing speak, amending to make it more informative. --gilgongo (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Outdated article title
Since wireframing is not only limited to websites I think the article should be renamed. This technique is also very popular in mobile dev and in ui dev in general.

This section "Aside from websites, wireframes are utilized for the prototyping of mobile sites, computer applications, or other screen-based products that involve human-computer interaction.[6] Future technologies and media will force wireframes to adapt and evolve." shows that somehow but I think it should be more emphasize on other areas where wireframes get used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.229.56.26 (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Old java wireframming software

 * DENIM, An Informal Tool For Early Stage Web Site and UI Design
 * SATIN, A Toolkit for Informal Ink-based Applications — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.95.188 (talk) 21:52, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Software section
I've deleted this as it's becoming a link farm and we'd never be able to preserve a section of this name without that happening. It was also refering to "prototypes" which hasn't been part of the wireframe definition. Note however that I've added a line to the intro about how wireframes can be produced in any medium including digital ones. --gilgongo (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've deleted it once again per WP:EL, WP:LINKFARM, WP:SOAP, Talk:Website_wireframe, and Talk:Website_wireframe. --Ronz (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * While we wait for an opinion from WP:THIRD, I'm going ahead and removing it again. Seems like there's pretty clear consensus here and across Wikipedia. --Ronz (talk) 17:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * THIRD OPINION: Hi guys, I think this can be approached via WP:ELNO point 14: "Lists of links to manufacturers, suppliers or customers" should be avoided. The very end of ELNO also states that "Stand-alone lists or embedded lists should not be composed mainly of external links" and the material you're discussing does seem to be an embedded list composed mainly of external links. Based on the foregoing, my advice would be to leave the list out. Hope this helps, --Dailycare (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've removed the list yet again. --gilgongo (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2018 (UTC)