Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dillo/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 22:58, 9 May 2009.

Dillo

 * Nominator(s): —Remember the dot (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

There's not much to this topic, so the article is fairly short, however I believe it is well-written and meets the featured article criteria. —Remember the dot (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * File:Dillo-icon.png is listed as free, have you a source for this? Fasach Nua (talk) 08:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The browser is licensed under the GPL, but I'm not sure about the icons. I don't think they're automatically GPLed. Sceptre (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The GPL release for the icons is now filed under OTRS ticket #2828838. —Remember the dot (talk) 18:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Tech. Review
 * 0 disambiguation links were found with the dab finder tool.
 * 0 dead external link were found with the links checker tool.
 * 0 ref formatting errors were found with WP:REFTOOLS.-- T ru  c o   14:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * What makes http://web.archive.org/web/20001025093052/on.openprojects.net/pipermail/gzilla/1999-August/000166.html a reliable source?
 * The article no longer uses this reference. —Remember the dot (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There is nothing on this ref: http://freehg.org/u/dillo/main/file/tip/ChangeLog
 * The link went dead. The content is now at http://hg.dillo.org/dillo/file/tip/ChangeLog, and the article now links there instead. —Remember the dot (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Current ref 34 (Damn Small Linux) is lacking a publisher
 * Fixed. —Remember the dot (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Current ref 35 (Feather Linux..) is lacking a publisher
 * Fixed. —Remember the dot (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The main concern is how much of this article is sourced to information that is primary, or provided directly by the project itself.
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:33, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The sources from the project are mainly used to reference information about Dillo's features and development, which seems fine to me. Are there any specific sources that you'd like to see referenced instead? —Remember the dot (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not familiar with the subject matter, so I wouldn't have the first clue how to find something to source information. However, I don't need to be familiar with the subject matter to know that sourcing an article from information by the subject can be a concern. It'd be like writing a biography of Richard Nixon only using his autobiography, while it's possible to write something that way, it may not be the best method. Is there no substantial third-party coverage of this browser in reliable sources? Ealdgyth - Talk 19:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have cited the available third-party sources wherever appropriate, and have strived to avoid bias within the article. I think that's the best anyone can do. —Remember the dot (talk) 07:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked at this, too, but I am unsure what should be cited to primary sources and what should not in this area. I'm sorry I can't help more. Awadewit (talk) 00:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments - This article is clearly written, but I'm wondering if it can be expanded in a few areas.
 * The lead is not a summary of the article. Some of the history of the development of Dillo is presented in the lead and not repeated in the article. For example, the origin of Dillo is only presented in the lead.
 * The lead section is meant to be both a summary and an introduction, presenting background information that will not be repeated later in the article. Repeating the same information about Dillo's origin and goals one paragraph later would be redundant. —Remember the dot (talk) 01:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, according to WP:LEAD, that is exactly what the article is supposed to do: "Significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article, although specific facts, such as birthdates, titles, or scientific designations will often appear in the lead only, as may certain quotations. This should not be taken to exclude information from the lead, but to include it in both the lead and body: in a well-constructed article, the relative emphasis given to information in the lead will be reflected in the rest of the text. Do not tease the reader by hinting at startling facts without describing them." Awadewit (talk) 02:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is what I see in the lead that is not repeated in the body:
 * Dillo's license, the GNU General Public License. This is also given in the infobox.
 * The year of Dillo's first release, its "birthday" if you will, again given in the infobox.
 * Dillo's "parent" Jorge Arellano Cid, once more given in the infobox, and referenced in the "Development" section as well.
 * Dillo's primary goal of democratization, referenced in the "Features" section but not repeated again at length.
 * Facts like these are ideal for an introduction but repeating them a paragraph or two later would be awkward. I do not feel that any of these statements constitute "hinting at startling facts without describing them." —Remember the dot (talk) 04:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The second paragraph of the lead reads this way "Chilean software engineer Jorge Arellano Cid conceived of the Dillo project in late 1999,[5] publishing the first version of Dillo in December of that year.[6] His primary goal in creating Dillo was to democratize access to information. Cid believed that no one should have to buy a new computer or pay for broadband in order to enjoy the web." The "Development" section then continues "Jorge Arellano Cid is still Dillo's lead developer today." - This origin story is only in the lead and the lead is not structured as a summary. There are different ways of reading Wikipedia articles - some people only read the lead and some people only read the article body and some people read both. We need to accommodate all of those styles. Writing a summary of such a short article may be awkward, but that is how our articles are structured. Awadewit (talk) 15:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I compared this article to Opera (web browser) and the "Features" section is much shorter. Can anything else on security and usability be added?
 * Not really; Dillo doesn't have many features. As far as security, the security company Secunia doesn't have up-to-date information on Dillo's vulnerabilities (if there are any). Dillo doesn't support HTTP Secure, nor does it support HTTP cookies. Both of these characteristics are already mentioned in the article. —Remember the dot (talk) 01:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * What is "in development" for Dillo? Could we have a "Future plans" section?
 * CSS and HTTPS support. CSS is mentioned in the "Development" section and HTTPS is mentioned in the "Features" section. There isn't enough material to make a whole section about it. —Remember the dot (talk) 01:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this article! Awadewit (talk) 00:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You're very welcome! —Remember the dot (talk) 01:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I will be happy to support after the lead issue is resolved. Awadewit (talk) 02:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose from Cryptic C62. The article does not conform to WP:LEAD and presents some information in a non-encyclopedic way. Details:
 * "other aspects of web pages, such as scripting and styling, it ignores" Awkward sentence structure. Either start with "it ignores" or replace "it ignores" with something more substantial: "other aspects of web pages, such as scripting and styling, are ignored entirely.
 * "Jorge Arellano Cid is still Dillo's lead developer today." This is a bad way to start this section. I realize you mentioned that Cid was the lead programmer in the lead, but the lead is meant to summarize facts that are already presented elsewhere in the article. You should review WP:LEAD. This section should start from the beginning; the sentence in question drops the reader right into the middle.
 * This goes hand-in-hand with the previous comment, but the Development section should probably start with the programming paragraph and transition into the funding paragraph; this is a more logical sequence than the current one.
 * "Work toward supporting CSS started in 2002, but a stable version of Dillo that supports CSS has not yet been released." One-sentence paragraphs = bad. Also, why would a sentence about 2002 come after a paragraph about ~2008?
 * Again, the features section should include the relevant information presented in the lead.
 * "...and home page can be customized by editing a configuration file" Wikipedia is WP:NOT an instruction manual; details such as how to customize things are not necessary.
 * "For both privacy and performance reasons, the web cache and history are automatically deleted upon closing the program." This could be relevant information, depending on how you write about it. Suggested rewrite: "While most web browsers retain the web cache and history after the program is closed, Dillo automatically clears them to improve performance." or some such.
 * More to come. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.