Talk:Citrio

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

untitled

I am using this browser for wikipedia, is the browser approved and does it meet wikipedia Terms of service 79.65.251.11 (talk) 10:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discontinued?

@Codename Lisa: https://epom.com/ and http://citrio.com/ are both still up and running, and I don't see anything to indicate that they have discontinued this project. ZackTheCardshark (talk) 16:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ZackTheCardshark: Hi. ~~Citrio.com is returning a 404 error.~~ Also, the infobox says the browser is not updated since 2015. If the website has been down since then, it is obvious why.

I agree that epom.com is responding this time. Please consult with WP:EL to see if it should be included.

Nevertheless, I have unwatched this page and have other priorities. Feel free to take whatever editorial decision you see fit.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Citrio.com is back online. —Codename Lisa (talk) 06:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update 2: I have updated the infobox with new release info.

I think it was providence's work that this vandal decided to vandalize this article today. (Believe it is well-established that this is a vandal. I just don't want to tell a long story.)

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 06:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Codename Lisa: I could assume good faith and say that you are mistaken about a great many things, but I don’t need to assume since we once again have proof that you are not truthful. I have I unwatched this page Oh, really? Your aspersions of vandalism are no more truthful (as several admins have already told you). 174.226.128.148 (talk) 12:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, ZackTheCardshark

I believe the message above is for your benefit, not me, because administrator Dlohcierekim has already blocked this person's other IP address. Of course, editors still receive reversion notifications on the pages that they don't have in their watchlists.

Anyway, am I correct that everything ended to your satisfaction? I reverted my "discontinued" statement, reinstated the official website, and updated the version numbers.

And if you want, I can give you a quick tour of Wikipedia tools that help you discover whether two IP addresses belong to the same person.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 13:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Codename Lisa: I wonder whether the site really was down and back up and down and back up again in the space of two days (between the times that you checked it and times that I did), or whether you were on a network whose administrator chose to block the site for safety reasons. Thanks for your efforts. I'm still only an occasional Wikipedian, but I would certainly be interested in learning about those tools if you could point me in the right direction. ZackTheCardshark (talk) 16:41, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]