Talk:Pivot Animator

message: The deletion of PivotX/XPivot and the addition of Pivot+ has pretty much turned the page upside-down. I was frustrated about the References and External Links so me and WaterFox edited it. But because XPivot was deleted the picture of XPivot at the top of the page is not making any sense. We must change this to the original picture of Pivot Stick Figure Animator before this gets out of hand. 10:31, 1 December 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.38.220.167 (talk)      
PivotX is not a legitimate version of Pivot, and therefore should not be included in the official program, as it can cause confusion for people looking for trustworthy and official versions of Pivot. I do not want Pivot getting a bad name for some pointless and skill-lacking modification which tracks IPs for NO APPARENT REASON. There is no reason for it to do so, and I can say this without regretting what I say because I have never heard of programs of any kind which track IPs like this program.
Please note PivotX has no proper modifications which make it better or more advanced than Pivot. For your safety, your computers safety and the reputation of Peter Bone and Pivot, please only download the official versions --Bolt the Superdog (talk) 07:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have completely redone the article to better categorize and make the information simpler to read and cleaner in spelling in grammar. Please make any of the few corrections where needed, but I believe in my opinion(and in many others) that this setup of the article will be best for viewing of the information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Medessec (talk • contribs) 06:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: This Article needed redoing

message: :Image:Pivotlogo.JPG 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 (talk) 21:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pivotlogo.JPG

message: I was on darkdemon the other day, and it someone said that the Pivot 3 full verison idea was scrapped, and Peter will no longer be working on it. Peter Bone also has an account on darkdemon as well, so should we edit the section of the article of Pivot 3? 
NaiJohnny (talk) 03:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No pivot 3 

message: I have pivot 2.2.5 and 3.1 beta. I Just want you guys to know that pivot 3.1 Beta has a .piv and .GIF bug. When you save as a GIF in Pivot 3, sometimes the animation is real slow. When you save as a .piv in Pivot 3beta the last 5 or 6 frames are gone. So I'm just saying Pivot 3 Beta has save and load bugs. Which is why I prefer Pivot 2.2.5 better. Even though it cant load sprites. So what? Its JUST MY OPINION.... 20:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pivot 3 Bugs 

message: I say this needs a cleanup.  A lot is badly phrased and needs to be reworded.  --Super Shy Guy Bros.Not shy? 10:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SOFIXIT! :) hmwithτ 21:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I noticed someone has changed a link from Droidz to stickman legacy. Being a member of darkdemon, I am pretty sure that this isnt the largest pivot forum around, with darkdemon topping 10,000 members and this forum having around 100. I would suggest that people do not use this article to advertise thier current pivot forum, and maybe links to forums should not be made avalible in this article. Im going to change that section to a list, but someone with more experience should maybe find a better way to show the larger forums but let people know about the numerous smaller ones. EDIT: Oh, and whoever was advertising Stickman legacy sneaked his link into the external links sections, which im pretty sure is only for important things. Edited out, and again, i dont think that any forums should be blantantly edited in over others. I missed some, feel free to add in ones I missed, and edit how I did it.--EatenBanana (talk) 23:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Links to forums should not be in the article per WP:LINKSTOAVOID. hmwithτ 21:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Forums

message: i dont agree with the reword but ill do it  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hintss (talk • contribs) 06:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  reword 

message: I don't think that new (and especially FREE) forums should be advertised. If they reach some crazy sum of members and/or contain things that actually DIFFER from Darkdemon or Droidz rather than being cheap impersonations then yeah sure, link away. For now these forums/websites do NOT need to be linked. For that matter singular people are NOT important enough to be put up. Even Liquid has been left out so, yeah. No idiotic youtube freaks please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SlashedGryffan (talk • contribs) 13:53, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for following through on that Stickman Legacy link Slashed, you'd think they would learn >:C. And if darkdemon isnt on here anymore, any forum with under 50,00 members should not. and on those terms, individual pivoteers being reconized is beyond insane.--EatenBanana (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed the formatting of the above comment so it doesn't warp browsers, and I also agree about the forums. I remove them on this page as soon as I notice they have been added. hmwithτ 00:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stick Legacy and the wetpaint links REMOVED 

message: http://www.pivotanimation.tk/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smallman12q (talk • contribs) 
: hmwithτ 00:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the link. I didn't realize that it was a forum; I thought that it was the new Pivot website. Sorry for the misunderstanding. hmwithτ 21:12, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: New link

message: I think that I'll try to clean up this article. It's a mess of uncited claims and it appears to have been written almost entirely by fans of the software.
I've already started a bit, but I'll do some more when I have time. --Squid tamer (talk) 03:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Page Cleanup

message: I reworded the whole article. If anything is wrong, pass it by me and i will change it ;) Wikicleaner2 (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: )  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikicleaner2 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redid Article 

message: I can't find those. There aren't the homepage of that software or homepage of maker of that software. (Sorry for the bad english... (Finnish)) --80.221.112.196 (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to homepage or loadpage? 

message: I'm re-rating it as a stub as it doesn't have any sensible sources at all. If it had some more sources it'd probably be a C and maybe even a B. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Review

message: * http://www.animatorhost.com
* http://droidz.org
* http://www.darkdemon.org
Maybe they can be re-worked. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old invalid references 

message: Is there literally a real Pivot 4.0? Gimme a link if there is 124.170.251.6 (talk) 11:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pivot 4.0 

message: I'd rather not have a modded version of Pivot shown in the screenshot in the software information box. Could this be replaced with a screenshot of the original 2.2.5 version created by me. Thanks, Peter Bone.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.22.82 (talk) 08:28, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would, but I just joined wikipedia and can't upload an image yet. --Aasuddjian (talk) 08:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Iusta (talk) 08:38, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshot 

message: Now that we know that there will be no future Pivot releases, I added a subsection called "future releases" to talk about the fact that there will be none. Also added information about another project, stykz, that is based on the Pivot project. After a couple hours' worth of research, it seemed that stykz was the only program available that does what Pivot does. --Aasuddjian (talk) 08:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added release info, re-categorized info 

message: I'm going to plan on cleaning this up so that it meets Wikipedia's quality standards. Kaltiz (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning this up 

message: The link to the site and the download button there gave me a virus.... I think. Should the link be taken out or anything?
82.173.115.49 (talk) 16:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this of any importance?