Talk:Microsoft SharePoint Workspace

message: This product has barely been released... I can't imagine many people are already using a colloquial term like 'grooviquette' when talking about it. I propose removing this section. CarrerCrytharis 01:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Barely been released"?  As a Microsoft Office component, certainly, but it was a standalone product for a long time before the Microsoft buyout. Simxp 15:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Grooviquette'? 

message: OK, I'm too new to Wikipedia to take a bold action like this, but it seems the "criticisms" section is purely editorial (non-neutral and non-verifiable).  Is this the kind of thing one should feel free to edit out?
--24.34.151.67 16:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the entire section. It was totally unreferenced, and written in an unencyclopediac, editorial, PoV tone. It can be readded with enough referenced and proper criticisms. Or criticisms be inlined. --soum (0_o) 07:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Likewise, the "Vendor Lock-in" section is just as non-NPOV.  Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but just saying it doesn't make it so.  If it's really an issue there should be some supporting evidence.  I'm removing that section.  196.40.38.33 (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've been using Groove for a few years now, and the vendor lock-in is really a problem, causing Groove to become a dead-end for all data we've put in there, unless we wrote our own application to talk to Groove's API (which is a neck-breaker for non software developing companies and private users). Maybe this is better in newer versions, but as far as I know Microsoft's policy of interoperability with others, I highly doubt that. Groove has it's advantages, but people should know what to expect when they start using it. Anyone got any suggestions how to get that back into the article, properly written as NPOV? ...because this is what makes Wikipedia so great: You get an honest (user)view of things - not the saleman's. The rooker (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 10:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticisms

message: :Image:Grooveicon.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 22:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Grooveicon.png

message: This article would really benefit from a screen shot with some data in, it would help clarify would the app does.  The one at the moment is better than nothing, but not that useful really. Quietbritishjim (talk) 08:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Better Screenshot

message: Someone who knows the software should re-write this section, which I personally found incomprehensible.
"Tools that members use in a workspace often drive the nature of the person-to-person collaboration that ensues. In Groove 2007, the SharePoint Files tools can be used to take Sharepoint 2007 document libraries offline."
In the first sentence, does this mean that the nature of the collaboration is influenced by the tools that they happen to make available in a given workspace?   Is this in fact talking about the unique power of the workspace configurator to influence the extent of the collaboration?
Secondly, by "taking offline" do we mean "make unavailable" or "make available even when not online"?
Matt Whyndham (talk) 10:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tools : please explain 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Microsoft SharePoint Workspace. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130727021139/http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/servers/groove-server-2010-features-and-benefits-HA101810271.aspx to http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/servers/groove-server-2010-features-and-benefits-HA101810271.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090826005514/http://solutions.hommesetprocess.com/collaborative-solutions/microsoft-office-groove-2007-and-microsoft-office-sharepoint to http://solutions.hommesetprocess.com/collaborative-solutions/microsoft-office-groove-2007-and-microsoft-office-sharepoint
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified