Talk:Netscape Navigator 9

message: I think we need the system requirements for Netscape Navigator 9. If the format doesn't match the standards of WP:MOS, please don't remove it, just modify it.
--Astroview120mm 03:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  System Requirements 

message: Do we really need to have a separate article about a specific version number of this browser? Shouldn't it be merged with Netscape (web browser) because an article like this is redundant. — EliasAlucard / Discussion 15:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As discussed before; irrelevent since none of the Netscape browsers with a different article on Wikipedia are the same. Netscape has changed drastically, and there's far too much information to put into one article. They've been like this for years; whether Netscape the company isn't supporting them or not, they exist and are a strong item of Internet history. I'd say leave the existing system how it is /Marbles (talk) 16:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but what's the point of having different articles for version numbers? I know they have different owners, but the brand is still the same (i.e., "Netscape"), and that alone should be enough to put together all these separate articles into one article. The different proprietors of each version number can be listed in the same article. — EliasAlucard / Discussion 17:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been discussed numerous times accross many Netscape pages. The conclusion made was it wasn't likely that all 8 different versions of Netscape browsers could be accommodated into one article, in the required detail. Hence why we have Netscape (web browser) for that purpose; to put brief detail on each one into a single article. The detail that is required for all the Netscape browsers over 14 years cannot be condensed into it. Netscape is a company, not a browser. The current article arrangement goes by the technologies that were used for each release, i.e. Netscape Navigator (versions 1-4.5), Netscape Communicator (versions 4.5-4.8), Netscape 6, Netscape 7, Netscape Browser and Netscape Navigator 9. Each version is a completely different program to another, produced by different people, or based on different code. I can't see myself why you'd want to change this arrangement on Wikipedia, which has been in use for a few years now, and has previously proved to be the best way of dealing with 14 years worth of software. We have Netscape (web browser) for people who want a condensed guide of all the browsers. For the more detailed information on specific software, we have the browser pages. We have both, and its impossible to have one page for all besides what we have now. /Marbles (talk) 18:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge for discussion 

message: Helploose's reasons for reverting the screenshot are ridiculous. Wikipedia is a community project, which does not permit one or two people to edit select pages exclusively. You have no right to "prevent" people from re-uploading better screenshots. As Helploose clearly stated, s/he was to upload odd numbers, of which, I have uploaded a superior even number. The previous screenshot of Navigator 9 claiming to be 9.0.0.6 could well have been 9.0.0.5, 9.0.0.4 or anything. The version 9.0.0.6 has the Migrator Icon, of which the image I replaced lacked. In addition it was taken in a Windows 9x system, as discussed above. I think you'll find I was the first person to ever upload a screenshot of Navigator 9; I was the first to even to write this article, you cannot claim another Wikipedian to be wrong. There is never "no reason" for any Wikipedia edit, and claiming the invalidity of an edit clearly an enhancement on its predecessor is complete rubbish. "Consensuses" do not exist on Wikipedia I'm afraid, we are an international, community and free project benefitting from the knowledge and posessions of our users, which does not bind experts to a particular field. Such was the flaw of Nupedia. If people continue to rubbish other user's more comprehensive edits and go into edit wars, so be it; waste such time on little preoccupancies. If you want to continue to downtread articles in such a manner by insulting other users and using inferior information or media, so be it, but I shall not waste any more of my resources on this sort of "international collaboration" project where there clearly is a sense of heirachy and posession. I think some people should re-consider their position. /Marbles (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, what is the point of uploading an new image from 9.0.0.6? And the agreement was that Astroview should upload this picture, and if he/she did not, I should. And the theme is from Windows 9x, the operating system does not have to be the same. is really your image better? (I think it is too big). I have disabled the migration icon, but I guess that is supposed to be done, I think the image looks better without one tooHelpsloose 00:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, that wasn't the agreement >:(. The agreement was to stop revert wars and that to stop it between us we would do it. The rest are free to do whatever they want. Wikipedia is belongs to the  people right?Astroview120mm (talk) 00:19, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Screenshot

message: ::I flagged the New Features Section as Advert, or parts of it. It's sort of borderline, but the parts that are written in present tense stick out to me as subtle advertising. Not everyone would pick up on it and I had to re-read it. It has references, but it's clearly written separately from the person whose contributions are in past tense and have a more balanced view of the Browser. I don't know if it's worth it to check the references, though they too are likely promotional/product review-related. If nothing else, some copy-editing might fix it up.
Thanks,
-Alan 24.184.184.177 (talk) 02:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure I think that you have some reasonable changes in mind - so go for them. As far as the references go, they are certainly going to be first-hand reports (i.e. from Netscape) and inherently promotional, but that in no way makes them less credible. They would be the ones who would know the features of their own product. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see someone surreptitiously removed the flag. I added it back in, seeing as no changes whatsoever had been made to improve the neutrality of the section. Kind of makes you wonder. And while I'm here, should the words "Latest Release" in the infobox be changed to "Final Release" due to the discontinuation of the product?
-Alan 24.184.184.177 (talk) 01:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure That was me; I removed it because I don't think it reads as an advertisement, and (if I recall correctly), there was no post on talk. Please re-word it as you see fit. "Final release" makes sense to me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Features=Advert? 

message: What's the difference between Mozilla Firefox and Netscape Navigator? Because I can't tell!
Takdir Takdir83 (talk) 01:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mozilla or  Netscape 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Netscape Navigator 9. 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/20090110055633/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=8124 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=8124
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090109131928/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=8525 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=8525
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080327163247/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6418 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6418
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090109025041/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6926 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6926
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071015194957/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6558 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6558
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090112183341/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6677 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6677
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080528233740/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6459 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6459
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090112183346/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=7187 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=7187
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080528233740/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6459 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=6459
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090112183357/http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=8692 to http://community.netscape.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ws-nscpbrowser&tid=8692
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://blog.netscape.com/2007/09/25/and-the-winner-is/
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) 11:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)