Talk:Firefox/Archive 1

message: I reverted from the version by Cgs to my last version because his screenshot does not have the default settings, and there was no need to change the image I posted.  The current image is OS independent and Wikipedia:Software screenshots says thats ok. Perl 17:06, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as the Wikipedia:Software screenshots page clearly states, it is not an existing consensus - I set it up more as a request for comments than anything else. I suggest that people don't waste time, bandwidth, and disk-space creating more and more screenshots until some conclusions have been reached. - IMSoP 17:12, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I thought those were the conclusions reached from discussion. CGS 02:02, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: Well in general, I agree, but over the last few months about half a dozen different people have decided that this picture was indeed "wrong" in some way - so I figured it would be a good idea to define what "right" was. Hopefully then we can all spend our time on something more productive. - IMSoP 11:18, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Screenshots, again

message: The Firesomething extension isn't just some personal extension, so I don't see why it was removed. I know that not every extension needs to be listed, but this one is getting some attention recently . -- LGagnon
You'll also note that I tried to edit the mention in such a way that its relationship to the official product, and the official changes of name, was clearer - I only didn't go further, because I didn't want to use up a disproportionate amount of the article explaining who'd written it and why. - IMSoP 23:29, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Firesomething

message: I removed the "mozilla/browser" reference from the opener as it wasn't a public name for the browser.  Internal development names in an opener don't seem encyclopedic.  The public knew it as Phoenix, followed by Firebird, then Firefox. -- Stevietheman 16:43, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Opener Change

message: I'm not that flash on North Island geography (having lived in Invercargill all my life) but I would have said that Whangamta was in the Coromandel and not the Bay of Plenty. Anyway with more knowledge willing to comment--enceladus 10:37, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whangamata 

message: Is Deer Park is not Deer Park, Victoria, but just a symbolic name. I was riding LIRR a few weeks ago and saw the name go by and I thought it sounded nice. 
-Ben
:Since your IP resolves to h162.mozilla.mv.meer.net, and meer.net states it is located in Mountain View, I guess you're really Ben.  Ever think of signing up for Wikipedia?  It's free... --Me at work 17:13, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deer Park 

message: Wikipedia is not dmoz! That's why I removed some links. --Albert Feller 17:47, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there was an overage of links... --Me at work 22:01, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Hey Tannin - rather than having a revert war with you, can you please tell me specifically what's Firefox "advocacy"? Andre (talk)  23:16, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
:I am not Tannin, but I can guess what he meant by "advocacy" - sounds like he thought the changes were to "pro Firefox".... in other words, not NPOV.  Well, I'll agree it's hard not to like Firefox, but personally I don't agree... -[Unknown] 07:40, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
I agree, Andrevan. The entry as a whole has all the right ingredients, but it's let down by a whole stack of fan-boy advocacy stuff. It reads like a press release put out by a PR firm. For example:
* in the very first paragraph, it says: Even before the 1.0 release ... Firefox garnered a great deal of positive acclaim. 
* Or, Firefox has attracted attention as an alternative to Microsoft Internet Explorer, since  (various things wrong with IE). This, strictly speaking, is true, but it is highly misleading. So far as better, more secure browsers that improve on IE go, Firefox is only a johhny-come-lately: it's treading a path already pioneeered by Opera, Mozilla, and others. The article reads as though Firefox pioneered all this better-than-explorer stuff.
There are others, but these are the worst. Tannin 07:55, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Tannin; I've always felt uncomfortable with this article, but I couldn't put my finger on it till Tannin expressed it so eloquently. Johnleemk | Talk 09:20, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: I've rewritten the page; how is it now? Johnleemk | Talk 09:31, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: Are you going to support the article's candidacy for featured status now? ;-) Johnleemk | Talk 09:40, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Advocacy"