User talk:Hm2k/Archives/2009/July

Thanks
Thank you, again. I'm still learning wiki. Onnozele (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Nexista?
Any reason why you removed Nexista from the web application frameworks comparison page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Informedbanker (talk • contribs) 05:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Response can be found here. --Hm2k (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Online backup?
Why did you remove two entries, and mess up the table? 71.135.161.147 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC).

Dear Hm2k. Each online backup source I added is backed by information from the vendor website, which is linked from the page. Each fact can be verified by visiting the website. If you prefer I can add a "sampled as of date" to each entry, but it is not clear to me how that would be done for a comparison table, and I don't find a good example in other product or service comparison tables on wikipeda. BryceN (talk) 03:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. --Hm2k (talk) 09:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Please stop deleting grid entries from online backup services. I welcome you to talk, but please do not just delete. BryceN (talk) 22:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * You have already been warned about this issue, also note that further comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. --Hm2k (talk) 23:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hm2k. You have warned without debate. I have opened a request for comments. I am attempting to act in good faith. Please stop deleting the content I post. BryceN (talk) 01:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * There is no debate, I don't make the rules, wikipedia does. It would be more appropriate to continue this discussion on the article talk page. --Hm2k (talk) 08:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

dynwebstats
2009-06-02: List of web analytics software: dynwebstats has been removed once more (with comment "lacks notability"). Is notability always related to quality? Regards, -- Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.83.165.34 (talk) 09:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, List of web analytics software. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles nor are such pages a forum. Thank you.
 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -->
 * --Hm2k (talk) 10:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Shell Account
Very glad this dispute for Shell Account was resolved properly according to wikipedia policies. Thanks for your contributions.

Dren (talk) 08:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

AEF was found in Softaculous a Popular Auto Installer. Hence it should be here as well
Well then how about OpenSourceCMS: http://php.opensourcecms.com/scripts/show.php?catid=5&cat=Forums

or ForumMatrix.org: http://www.forummatrix.org/show/Advanced-Electron-Forum

AND a Tech Magazine published this article as the Article of the month in its Magazine in India: http://www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=61026

Is that sufficient. Its at hotscripts, thousands of Pages Linking to it Indexed by google. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.61.131.197 (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Comparison of Internet forum software (PHP)‎. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles nor are such pages a forum. Thank you.
 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -->
 * --Hm2k (talk) 20:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

up.time removed from systems management
Any particular reason up.time was removed from the list of systems management systems? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.241.134.174 (talk) 17:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it lacks notability. It did not belong. --Hm2k (talk) 08:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Shell account
Hello !

Please don't remove the 3O template on the article page, until the external links dispute is resolved, or I will need to report you to the intervention against vandalism.

Regards, Prunk (talk) 08:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * HI! I removed it because a third opinion has already been given, we don't need a forth. Thanks for being inappropriate! --Hm2k (talk) 09:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not an attempt at giving a 3rd opinion but a call to recommend dispute resolution or 3O, if I'm reading the edit summary you made here correctly. MuZemike 21:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you're mistaken. He clearly gives his opinion, then offers a suggestion to help prevent this situation in the future. As far as I can see, no further action is needed. --Hm2k (talk) 21:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

About "junk, lack of notability"
Hello,

you remove Limonade because of "junk, lack of notability". Sure it's a pretty young project but there is a little comunity that's growing fast (essentially through Twitter and Github). When do you consider a project is "mature" enough to be inserted in this list ? Is the popularity is the only criteria to share informations about a framework in this page ?

Thks, Fabrice Luraine (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC) Fabrice
 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add content (particularly if you change facts and figures), as you have to the article Comparison of web application frameworks‎, please cite a reliable source for the content you're adding or changing. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Hm2k (talk) 17:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

SuperFlexible
Please note my comment at the discussion page PizzaMan (talk) 14:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have replied. --Hm2k (talk) 14:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Icon editors
You are claiming that @icon sushi and IconBuilder are icon editors. Just try to use them to understand that they are not editors. The former is an image-to-icon converter with limited capabilities to correct the result; the latter is a plugin for Adobe Photoshop which allows you to export images into icon file formats. You cannot edit an icon with any of these tools. —Ippopotamus (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. I have now merged Icon editor with Computer icon as per the talk, thus no longer making these "Icon Editors", but "Computer icon software" instead and so both @icon sushi and IconBuilder are "Computer icon software" and will remain in the list. --Hm2k (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Now I agree. —Ippopotamus (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Shell account dispute
I can see that you ran in the silent problem and I thought it might be helpful to chip in at this point. Looking at the negative response there, I can't see much choice but to suggest the next step would be an WP:RFC. Either way, the question proposed for a 3O or RFC needs to be neutral and so seem fair to both sides. Considering the failure of the last 3O to resolve the issue, the process to be followed and the text of the question should be comfortably agreed between the active parties. It may be better to ask someone from the other side of the debate to suggest some neutral wording.—Ash (talk) 00:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. I've made steps towards this. --Hm2k (talk) 08:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I noticed that the latest wording was not that clear of your intent. I think you were talking about raising a 3O though you could have meant a RFC. You could revise to say something like "I propose we raise a RFC with the following question in order to resolve the issue:" (or for a 3O if that was what you were proposing). Sorry about this, I'm not intending to monitor the page but it caught my attention.—Ash (talk) 13:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I want to resolve it. I think the idea is to attempt another 3O, this time with neutral wording, failing that, submit an RFC. Unless your advice is to go straight for an RFC? --Hm2k (talk) 13:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As I notice that two other authors chipped in during the discussion with opinions rather than just technical clarifications, I would at this point recommend an RFC rather than a 3O; even though it is a relatively minor issue. Due to the silence you encountered before, you may have to be prepared to let it run the full 30 days to ensure everyone interested actually has time to notice the page and respond (not everyone logs in every week). If you do choose the RFC remember to phrase it as a simple support/oppose style question, these tend to avoid rambling comments.—Ash (talk) 14:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've updated the proposal to be suitable for an RFC. I've tried to keep it simple and neutral, I trust it is suitable. I'm happy for the RFC to be open for 30 days, although obviously I'd rather it be resolved quicker. Your input has been invaluable. --Hm2k (talk) 14:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

3O FAQ
You may find Wikipedia_talk:Third_opinion of interest as it follows on from your earlier comments on that talk page. Your comments as a User are welcome.—Ash (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update, I will add my comments. --Hm2k (talk) 15:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)