Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-22 Thread Donald Whytock
There was talk in the Talk of splitting the article, giving AOO its own page and putting the project, along with its drama recap, on its own. Maybe rather than an OO page, there can be a History of OO page? Though if there isn't an OO page it might start a redirect war... Don On Mon, Jan 21,

Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-22 Thread Jürgen Schmidt
On 1/22/13 3:59 PM, Donald Whytock wrote: There was talk in the Talk of splitting the article, giving AOO its own page and putting the project, along with its drama recap, on its own. Maybe rather than an OO page, there can be a History of OO page? I hope not because AOO is OOO and even if

Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-22 Thread Rob Weir
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Saransh Sharma sara...@theupscale.in wrote: Is there any difference in OOO and AOO It was a product renaming. OpenOffice.org was the name used from 2000, when Sun initially made their StarOffice (acquired from StarDivision) product open source, until around

Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-21 Thread Rob Weir
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Donald Whytock dwhyt...@gmail.com wrote: Wikipedia has a lot of policy documents that are typically used to object to an article or a piece thereof. This comes out largely as finger-pointing with a laser sight, but it lends legitimacy to an argument.

Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-21 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Don Thanks Inline... Donald Whytock wrote: Wikipedia has a lot of policy documents that are typically used to object to an article or a piece thereof. This comes out largely as finger-pointing with a laser sight, but it lends legitimacy to an argument. Regarding conflicts of interest:

Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-21 Thread Rob Weir
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts lo...@apache.org wrote: Don Thanks Inline... Donald Whytock wrote: Wikipedia has a lot of policy documents that are typically used to object to an article or a piece thereof. This comes out largely as finger-pointing with a laser sight,

RE: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-20 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
I started looking through this. There probably needs to be a flag, because there are inappropriate sources and this is an opinion piece in the ways Rob has noticed. While browsing, In the prelude, the Apache License is described as among the weak copyleft licenses. It is not, and weak

Re: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-20 Thread Rob Weir
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts lo...@apache.org wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I started looking through this. There probably needs to be a flag, because there are inappropriate sources and this

RE: In case you missed it: The OpenOffice Wikipedia page was FUD'ed over the holidays

2013-01-20 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
I agree, Gerard has impeached himself with regard to any interest in or grasp of the facts, etc. Maybe he'll declare that DOA AOO to be a zombie that has eaten 30 million brains in 2012. I don't think there is much that makes someone ineligible to edit, but it certainly makes the result