Talk:Foobar2000

message: I believe the foobar2000 page lacks detail as to the extent that foobar can be customized. A brief section with details, core components and examples could be beneficiary. This is one of the main reasons users choose foobar over other media players and is thus an important aspect of the application, an aspect that is not immediately evident from the wiki page. Fofr 14:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Extensibility and Components

message: The name Tagz is not official. -- Canar 01:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The name 3M is was not official but that didn't stop the company from using it for ages and ages. I'm a descriptivist, and I think the name Tagz is helpful for people who want to find out more. --KJ 08:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonetheless, outdated information should be relegated to the footnote, not current information. Article changed to reflect this. -- Canar 19:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If people still call it Tagz, it's not outdated. --Kjoonlee 23:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

text: "%artist% - %title%" is pretty straight-forward and intuitive. Advanced usage is less straight-forward, but as the language lacks looping and other features of Turing-complete languages, it is less complex than most other scripting languages. Compare with Perl and Python if you'd like to see some complex scripting languages. -- Canar 16:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagz

message: There have been a number of edits lately trying to sneak in a link to a shock site, using a misleading and harmless-looking edit summary. Please don't.
To people who are interested in foobar2000: please check all edits for the time being, to spot vandalism. Thank you. --Kjoonlee 03:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both sites look the same to me, what is the difference? Dwayne Kirkwood 03:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Download the HTML source of shsc.biz, and look at the "External links" section. Download the source of the linked pages and you'll see. --Kjoonlee 04:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now I see. Thank you, I will keep watch. Dwayne Kirkwood 05:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Can anyone come up with any better sort order for features than I've currently got? Roughly, they're sorted by length as they appear on my screen. -- Canar 05:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't say that i do. however, i suggest that the minimal/normal/full instalation sections be removed since the last version of foobar2000 to contain more than one installer was 0.8.3. --Mangix 01:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But we still have Normal/Full/Minimum/Previous/Custom presets in the full installer. --Kjoonlee 04:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I once made a change in the order to match the list of components in the newest non-beta installer. It's easier to check for additions this way. --Kjoonlee 04:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: does anyone know of any websie which has a list of third party components? the current list is quite small and it doesn't really list the famous ones such as foo_ui_columns. would be a nice adition to the wiki. --Mangix 01:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

text: this page has most of it: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Foobar2000:Components_0.9 --Boombaard 01:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sort order 

message: Although the changelog mentions much about "improved vista compatibility," foobar is constantly crashing on my system. and there is not a sausage about this in the wiki. hmm. --Catbeef 04:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you using any third-party plugins? Are they all up-to-date? --Kjoonlee 05:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it was an outdated audioscrobbler that was causing the mischeif! forgot about that :( --Catbeef 02:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vista compatibility? 

message: Does anyone know when the player was first released?  Really, I'd be interested in seeing any of the players history and I didn't see it on the official site (which is firewalled for me right now anyway, unfortunately) --Morbid-o 19:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First public release was 2002-12-13 or earlier. I can't find the post that led to it, though... --Kjoonlee 19:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age 

message: I have removed the advertisement / NPOV tag, as I am not certain what is NPOV or advertising-like about giving a list of the features of the software. -- Canar 01:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't revert, but I think a list of features can sound like an advertisement at times. ("This software has these features... so go on and try it.") --Kjoonlee 02:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertisement / NPOV 

message: I added today some sources from well-known German publishers about good, notable and highly usable software products. Those publishers  are in no way related to the programm's author(s). Features, quality and notability are dicussed in these sources.
The German resources could e.g. be accessed via language tools of Google or Bablefish. I would like to suggest that you have a look at your favorite computer magazine in your home country to be able to add English reliable sources about foobar2000 originating of outside  both the Wikipedia and outside the HydrogenAudio domain.
BTW: It might be seen as an independant hint of notability for foobar2000 that there are up to 20 articles in other language versions of wikipedia about foobar2000. Because every and each Wiki has almost the same GUI you could e.g. access those articles' histories to get an estimate about how likely this piece of software is of the non-notable kind.
And it would be nice if someone else could please be so kind and add some independant and reliable English language resources about foobar2000.
Thank you!
PS:
I would like to make the additional suggestion that the tag 'This article does not cite ...' should not be removed until there is at least one such reliable external reference of US-American or British origin added to this article.
CasaMeaEuropea 23:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  then we keep the status quo - wikipedia is not about truth but verification. --Fredrick day (talk) 10:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable References and Sources 

message: Quite a number of dubious and questionable statements appear in the lead of this article, which seems particularly un-encyclopedia like. I've attempted to document them using using the necessary inline templates but those changes have been reverted for whatever reason. I'm particularly interested in the weasel words "High quality output" (in light of the developers claims)as well as this edit in which the program has moved from being best know for a "minimal" interface to a "highly customizable" one. 
Anyways I'd be willing to re-write it as to be more accurate, especially considering that the most of the 3rd-party components that might have made the program "highly customizable" are no longer being developed and are incompatible with the most recent versions of the program. 74.215.119.104 (talk) 00:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: After a few weeks with no objections to this suggestion, I've made the needed changes. 74.215.117.240 (talk) 11:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious Lead

message: This is the most widely used player among audiophiles. I'm not even one and I know that. Krystaleen (talk) 02:56, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See discussion above. Pit-yacker (talk) 20:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Just notability trolls further ruining Wikipedia. Nothing to see here, folks. Canar (talk) 17:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As above, see WP:AGF. Pit-yacker (talk) 21:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hard to assume good faith when this is the only one of many audio players of lesser notability that's being evaluated this way. "This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of obvious evidence to the contrary. Assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism. Rather, editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice." I will actively resist biased notability trolling on this page; if you are honestly so concerned about quality over quantity, I will accept your notability critiques after I see you make them on other software packages. Here's a list of others: Clementine (software) MediaMonkey Amarok (software). This behaviour is not conducive to building a better Wikipedia. I do not encourage you to do this. I encourage you to leave this page alone, as well as those I've listed. Please take this disingenuous, harmful legalism somewhere else. As you say, you don't have the time for this. I'll make sure of it. Canar (talk) 23:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is this player's notability is being argued? 

message: What other media player page has a section dedicated to features it doesn't have? 69.61.211.115 (talk) 19:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Limitations section?

message: Beta of Windows 10 Mobile version has been released into Windows Store (ref. foobar2000 Mobile Edition). Seems plan is to release iOS and Android versions also. -Nrautava (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: foobar2000 Mobile

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Foobar2000. 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/20160324/http://www.maximumpc.com/how-to-manage-your-music-the-power-user-way-with-foobar/ to http://www.foobar2000.org/
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) 23:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Foobar2000. 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/20120708074724/http://anythingbutipod.com/2009/11/foobar2000-v0969-review/ to http://anythingbutipod.com/2009/11/foobar2000-v0969-review/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120417090940/http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/assets/documents/Windows_7_ASIO_setup.pdf to http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/assets/documents/Windows_7_ASIO_setup.pdf
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) 07:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: How would we go about adding info about the macOS version of foobar2000 to this article, since the only source is a forum post by the developer? -KDDLB (talk) 20:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  macOS version 

message: What exactly is the mascot for Foobar 2000? (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Foobar2000_logo_2014.png)
Is it some type of alien? Whatever it is, it should have an entry in the article for 'Mascot' like other projects have. It should tell what the mascot is and any name it may have, if any. TIA.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.250.227.202 (talk) 21:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an aliencat. Grimes2 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  ---- icon consists of a white "alien cat". FWIW, on the top of the product's website, today, the 'cat' is black. https://www.foobar2000.org/  It may be time to be color-blind.  PRR (talk) 21:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mascot 

message: This is exactly the kind of popular, innovative and essential computer program that those who don't use would call non-notable and nominate for deletion. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tixati. So please delete this article preemptively before out-of-the-loopers start complaining. balls 67.182.74.74 (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh, I was gonna complain about you posting this since its sort of irrelevant to foobar, however your right about Tixati while that is certainly one of the lesser known torrent clients I would personally still consider it to be a obviously notable piece of software. Looks like though they decided to delete it in 2013 (7 years ago!), but no admin ever got around to actually doing it, so we probably need to start a new deletion review and get that decision reversed before somebody decides to actually delete it, which would just be a waste since its a pretty decent article for a lesser known piece of software. --Kwwhit5531 (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-notable please delete AFD now 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* Foobar2000 Windows 10.PNG
* 
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:08, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:21, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion