Talk:Ubuntu/Archive 3

message: I added a footnote to clarify support for SPARC. This contrasts with the  refrences used throughout the article, but it seemed like a good idea to keep such pedantry outside of the main article text. Does this look alright to everyone? If the clashing of different reference styles isn't so bad, I suggest we add more footnotes to explain minor details without cluttering up the main text too much, as this featured article does. Twinxor t 07:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My impression is that the information is outdated. See recent LugRadio interview w/ Mark Shuttleworth and someone from Sun. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 10:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Look here: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-announce/2006-June/000087.html - Samsara (talk • contribs) 10:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What, so the recently written releases page is completely wrong on the matter? Even if you don't believe that the SPARC release is unofficial, as the page claims, it's obvious that only the server edition is available for SPARC, and it seems silly to list two similar, relatively obscure Sun architectures when the same release covers both of them. Twinxor t 15:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The release page could well be wrong. Wanna contact them about this and see what they say? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 10:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: SPARC was unofficial up to relatively recently (a week or two ago), but is now official. Mark knew it was going to become official after a bit of a burn-in period, so was doubtless speaking in such terms in his interview. --Colin Watson 11:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that listing UltraSPARC and UltraSPARC T1 separately is odd. We (the Ubuntu team) don't consider them separate architectures. --Colin Watson 11:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can include this information if you make a press release. Taking your word for it would be considered original research, which Wikipedia has a policy against. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's obviously up to you, but note that http://releases.ubuntu.com/6.06/ only lists "Sun UltraSPARC computers, including those based on the multicore UltraSPARC T1 ("Niagara") processors" - i.e. a single architecture. --Colin Watson 11:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, you did say "go ask them", so I answered :-) We wouldn't make a press release about this sort of thing, but I'd be happy to clear up what we consider an architecture and what we consider a subarchitecture in a signed e-mail if somebody asked ubuntu-devel ... --Colin Watson 11:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologise for that. It's just that every once in a while, someone comes along and shouts "original research", and this can be escalated to the point where the text passage is simply removed entirely; I've recently had such an experience, and have become more conservative in the course of things. Also compare with my frustration on Talk:Fedora Core. You always get policy heads and others... - Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes 

message: In response to an anon edit, see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/EdgyEft to convince yourself that the name is intended to be "Edgy Eft", not "The Edgy Eft". - Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release name: Edgy Eft 

message: I think we should start a collection of diffs here for all the times that people have reverted between including the (oo-BOON-too) pronunciation help and removing it. Here goes the most recent one:
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ubuntu_%28Linux_distribution%29&diff=66063462&oldid=65951925
Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, thanks for the suggestion. That would probably be the best idea. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 15:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  LOL 

message: Referring to :
Unfortunately, the Ubuntu website provides potentially conflicting information. This page:
http://releases.ubuntu.com/6.06/
states
:You will need at least 192MB of RAM to install from this CD.
Seeing that  says that 256MB are needed, the above could be interpreted to mean that 192MB are needed to install, but 256MB to run it from the hard disk. In any case, 256MB is a more standard size than 192MB (how many machines will actually have 192MB exactly?), so I suggest we stick with the previous, less confusing version. We can, however, make a mention of the debian-installer based version of the CD. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ViperSnake's edit 

message: Could someone let me know how to pronounce certain words in this article?
* Canonical - I'm trying to figure out where to split that. Is it Canon-ical, Can-o-nickle or...? Ka-non-e-cal
* ubuntu - oo-bun-two (I'm basing that on the video, so I'm pretty certain I know how to say that) Oo-bun-two
* Xubuntu - Say the letter X then say ubuntu? Or is it one word?
* Kubuntu - Say the letter K then ubuntu? Or is it one word?
* Edubuntu - Say 'Ed' the ubuntu? Or is it one word?
* MEPIS - Err... I hesitate to ask. Meppis
* Progeny - Pro-jen-e? pro-jen-e
* Xandros - San-dross? (to rhyme with floss)
* Linux - Li (to rhyme with fly) nux (to rhyme with books) Lee-nux
* nUbuntu - Say the letter N then say ubuntu? Or is it one word?
* zUbuntu - Say the letter Z then say ubuntu? Or is it one word?
* fluxbuntu - Say the 'flux' then 'bun-two'?
Thanks in advance. I'd like to record a spoken verison of this before it hits the main page on August 5th. Provided I don't get too nervous and my cat stays quiet for a few hours. Icey 20:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There will probably be a pronunciation of "Ubuntu" provided as an audiofile at some point. As for the others, they are not the subject of this article. As these names are mostly passed on in written rather than spoken form, pronunciations vary a lot. Pronunciations I'm familiar with are ex-ubuntu and meppis. Canonical is actually an English word, as is progeny; consult a dictionary. It's Leenux. Read the articles. Most of them say. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 20:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Samsara, I've crossed out a few and I'll find out the others. I've got Linux from here. Icey 20:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like I'm not going to have enough time to make the spoken version before it hits the main page, but maybe I'll make it in the future. Icey 19:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The best thing (IMHO) would be to have a isiXhosa speaker pronouncing the name. If people don't agree, I could come up with a pronunciation file of my own. Should I say it with a British accent or should I try to imitate Nelson Mandela as faithfully as I can? --Kjoonlee 08:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what's trying to be said with the pronunciation description "oo-bun-two". The IPA transcription clearly states that the 3 vowel sounds are the same (all of them IPA:[u]) yet "oo-bun-two" implies (to me, a native English speaker) the long oo of soon, the soft u of bunt, and the word two, which has the same vowel sound as soon. One of those descriptions has to be wrong.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  08:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IPA is correct. "Oo-boon-too" would be more accurate.Twinxor t 09:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have never heard it pronounced that way though. The most common method of pronunciation is the 'oo-bun-two' method mentioned above. -Localzuk (talk) 13:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronouncing words 

message: Moved to Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing#Ubuntu_system_requirements.3F. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  System requirements? 

message: I'm not sure we need to promote all the one-man derivatives - there are also many more if you read the Ubuntu forums. The official derivatives are clearly much more than the derivatives with one or two packages different - in the footer box we are treating them as identical. Secretlondon 12:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'm not convinced there's any need for the footer. Several of the distributions linked have not even released yet. Twinxor t 07:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we remove and TfD it? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 08:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. pschemp | talk 08:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Derivatives

message: There should be mention of criticism of Ubuntu's use of non-free Launchpad (and Rosetta, Malone, etc.) Examples:
* On Ubuntu (Anthony Towns, Debian lead developer)
* Cancomical Lynchpad (Everybody Loves Eric Raymond)
It'd help if someone could find an article or interview, as well. EdC 00:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could probably be rolled in with Murdoch's criticism about non-compliance with Debian; Towns seems to be criticizing Ubuntu from the same angle. The Launchpad criticism is also comparable to controversy over kernel development using a proprietary versioning system. Twinxor t 07:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Launchpad non-free 

message: The "Features" section doesn't mention that the default installation CD for Ubunu is now the live CD. It also seems to imply that the Live CD is an alternative option for installation rather than the main method. I would rewrite this, but I'm hesitant to do so when it's featured. That section does need to be rewritten from scratch though so that it doesn't sound like it's self-contradictory. Theshibboleth 00:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I rewrote some of the section. What do you think of it now? Twinxor t 07:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Live CD v. "Traditional" Install CD 

message: The first paragraph is meaningless to the average reader, even to one with a modicum of computer savvy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.216.154.165 (talk • contribs) .
:It looks fine to me, but you're certainly welcome to improve it. —Keenan Pepper 00:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this article is anywhere near as good as most featured articles. I think it was pushed to the front page to market the OS. Just look at the article, it is nothing like a featured article. I am an ubuntu user, and this article does not do the OS justice. I haven't checked the 'featured article' vote or discusssion, but this looks sketchy.  I say fix the article so it deserves featured status, it doesn't as it is now. (Bjorn Tipling 11:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say I was slightly perplexed by the article as on the Main Page. The word "computer" does not appear, although I note that it does now in the lead paragraph in the article attached. I realise that to read Wikipedia you currently require a computer, but you don't have to be even familiar with a pc to operate it and a casual user may not understand the context of that first paragraph; they may not necessarily link to the main article to find out, either. Obviously as it is "out there" it is too late to do anything, but perhaps these comments may be archived with the featured example.LessHeard vanU 21:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think the FAC process is letting crap slip through, go fix the process. Complaining after the fact is less than productive. pschemp | talk 01:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not interested in the FA process. Commenting about an article after it achieves FA status alerts the editors to areas in which it can be further improved, and also where other articles may be improved before, during and after a FA nom (succesful or otherwise). Not productive? Whatever.LessHeard vanU 11:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is this a featured article? 

message: Err, there aren't. --Tess Tickle 02:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, at least it's not PaX! Twinxor t 07:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  PaX is alright, what I don't get is how such a small article, crammed full of random lists that should be sentences got through the FA process, this looks amature compared to PaX or OpenBSD.  65.94.57.162 13:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think that a lot of people are maybe just trying out their first Linux. Ubuntu is quite a 'fashionable' OS to be running at the mo.--82.9.55.184 13:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is there penis pictures on this page? 

message: I am here a bit late and am speaking as an outsider, and speaking to everyone involved... the view I have of this talk page is that there are several people criticising the article that did have a chance to participate in the FA process, but didn't, and who are perhaps not criticising in the most productive way possible. If there are things to fix, then please do consider fixing them, ( applies here as anywhere) or at least offering specific actionable suggestions that people can address. And try not to take the criticism from the article to the person, there has been some of that here too, I adjudge... it's not about saying people can't take criticism well, it's about being polite and constructive. Some of the article contributors may also want to consider letting comments that may not be perfect go by, without "rising to the bait" as it were... All IMHO. ++Lar: t/c 13:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its all very well to say 'well fix it yourself!', however it is a bit late when the article is already on the front page. The point everyone is trying to make is that these things should have been fixed BEFORE the article became an FA. Saying a particular article shouldn't have been FA is not criticising the editors personally, rather making a point that the vetting process obviously has issues. If you want particular things, IMO the most important one was simply the huge amount of jargon in the first paragraph. The article is obviously going to be refined, and i'm sure it will become great (like many articles on here) however personally the version which made it yesterday was sub par. If you can't hack that sort of criticism, then you're obviously not thinking objectively enough.Suicup 14:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The point you're missing here is that at this point in the process, your criticism comes off as sniping at the process, the contributors, and the article, rather than as useful. The small number of helpful suggestions made are being drowned out in the noise of ill feelings engendered. Suggesting that people "can't hack that sort of criticism" isn't really fair in my view. As I said, I just turned up here after the fact and that's my perception of how things are unfolding. Take it as you like. ++Lar: t/c 14:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: . The logical thing to do would be to try to fix the root cause then wouldn't it?. pschemp | talk 14:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suicup, you miss the point. Don't come here and complain about the FAC process - go there and do that. Here we only want constructive criticism about this article, not about how it got to where it is etc... Its pointless and arguing about it isn't going to help anyone or anything.-Localzuk (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it comes down to you not listening to us. Why complain about something that is not relevant to this article here? Complaining about this article becoming a FA is not something that can be dealt with here, it is something to discuss with those that do the FA choosing. Please don't continue this. Instead accept that this is the wrong place for the criticism you are making and move on. Also, using the 'he said this so I'm entitled to say this' kind of argument you have just done makes me think of 'two wrongs don't make a right'-Localzuk (talk) 15:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mate i'm not the only one who is 'complaining', so obviously there are others who feel the same way. Indeed, myself and others have offered constructive criticism of the article which you have simply rejected. Furthermore, if i feel the article shouldn't have been FA, i think this talk page is a perfectly good place to state that opinion. You just need to get off your high horse. Suicup 15:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suicup: Please remain civil. "You just need to get off your high horse" is never a civil comment IMHO. Consider this a somewhat more formal warning please. ++Lar: t/c 16:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suicup, this is in fact not the right place. If you don't want this to be an FA, the right place to state that opinion is WP:FARC. I doubt you'll succeed. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a big difference between 'don't want' and 'shouldn't have been'. Don't try to imply things i don't mean. Why don't you just take it on the chin? Suicup 01:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you still arguing about this? It is plain and simple: comments about how an article became FA should be at WP:FARC, comments about how to improve this article should be here. You just seem to have taken our advice and comments, about how your comments are not appropriate here, personally when in fact they are just comments about how complaining here about how this article shouldn't have become a featured article after it did are not useful, constructive, helpful or appreciated by anyone. Why not end this by just providing some sort of ways of improving the article? -Localzuk (talk) 12:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It becomes personal when the ban stick is wantonly waved at me for no reason. Suicup 12:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen no mention of banning on here. I have just seen people responding to your views to see things like 'get down of your high horse' being used in response. If you think something is personal, the best thing to do is take it elsewhere for mediation - there are plenty of systems in place for this.-Localzuk (talk) 12:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I am going to have to agree that a bulk of the criticism on this article probably does belong on the WP:FARC process, including some of my own. I also agree that more specific comments are also probably more helpful. However, rebuke to the criticsm, some of it legitimate, was taken personally when maybe it should not have. If I have some time this comming week, I will see if I can help improve the article. Sorry about my part in creating tension, I could have been friendlier. (Bjorn Tipling 19:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Outside view