From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


Nothing about the history of the system... anyone out there know anything about it?--sin-man 06:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


I wanted to look up what XOOPS did, it's history, it's difference with other CMS's... didn't say much... So I'm requesting for an expansion --sin-man 04:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


Wow, there is a lot of hyperbole in this article! I don't have time right this moment, but it needs a thorough going-over to sound a bit more objective. Michael Geary 06:37, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

I found that this edit seemingly came from this page of the official website. Mulukhiyya 18:44, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Until somone verifys that text isn't copyrighted, this article's getting an NPOV sticker...


I concur - hyperbolic, for example "with just a click of a mouse" Delivery:435

Made a start[edit]

I've made a start on improving the phrasiology/removing the hyperbole Delivery:435[edit]

Hello Christopher Monahan core development and doc teams have become aware of the definition of xoops and fully acknowledge your concerns and NVOP

We would however like to have been involved in the editing of the doument so it meets your standard. On behalf of the community I have noted the changes made in placing the POV on the article and also added some further edits and checked the external links. If you are happy with it now we respectfully request the NVOP be removed. (Jensclas from

Edit: how cane we get in touch with you? I can't find an email addie and do not wish to post mine so publicly here.

Propaganda[edit] Please read the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. In this document, it clearly states Wikipedia is not a propaganda machine. Not only did you not ingore the rules, but you also undid the cleanup. I am seriously recommending you to be banned if you keep this up.Selmo

Here is the Actual passage from WP:NOT

  1. Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views. You can also use Wikinfo which promotes a "sympathetic point of view" for every article.
  2. Self-promotion. The arbitration committee ruled on February 17, 2006 that: "Editors should avoid contributing to articles about themselves, their direct family or subjects in which they are personally involved, as it is difficult to maintain NPOV while doing so." [1] Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles, or to articles in which you have a personal stake, is similarly unacceptable. See Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Notability.
  3. Advertising. Articles about companies and products are acceptable if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example). Please note Wikipedia does not endorse any businesses and it does not set up affiliate programs. See also WP:CORP for a proposal on corporate notability.

Improving this article[edit]

As someone who's come across this article for the first time, there're a few problems in the way everything has been handled. Of course the article read as a puff piece at the beginning, but the most recent anonymous edit (I presume by Selmo) reverting had problems. First, it did not say where it reverted to, so it makes life difficult for anyone trying to contribute. When reverting, please state exactly where to. Secondly, it did not state why besides saying the changes were 'propaganda'. In my opinion, as someone who's never used the software and has no interest in it, and is reading this for the first time, the latest version before being reverted for propaganda reasons actually read as more neutral than the version anonymous/Selmo chose to revert to. For example, "Xoops supports multi-byte languages, including Japanese, Simplified and Traditional Chinese, Korean, etc" is more useful and reads as less blatant than "XOOPS was created and is maintained by a team of several volunteers working from all over the world." The phrase "all over the world" is marketing-speak. A list of multi-byte languages supported is at least factual.

Finally, almost none of the contributors to the talk page have signed their comments properly. This makes it more difficult to follow the comments, as we cannot see when or sometimes even who made the comment. Please add four tildes after your comment.

The changes made by the XOOPS team seem innocuous enough to me. They've openly stated who they are, and reading through them as a neutral none of the changes are too jarring. So, before blanket reversal, it would help to address which of their changes you think are 'propaganda', no matter how many mistakes you feel the XOOPS team have made in contributing to this article in the past. Addressing the issues individually instead of engaging in an edit war would help improve the article, as well as facilitate a more constructive approach by everyone involved. Greenman 21:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I would like to see a mention of how XOOPS has forked over the past few years, what it has forked into, and how those forks are different. There are at least two major forks, eXoops/RunCMS/RUNetCMS and XoopsCube, and there are at least three or four other minor forks. At the very least, I think the major forks should be described in this article. -- -- BBlackmoor (talk) 15:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

New edit[edit]

Hi, back - I have decided to remove the taskforce sticker, since I consider that any remaining issues to be non-critical, although I should state to the rep that I didn't put the NPOV sticker there, and when I made my edit I thought it would be best to subject it to peer review before removing the tag, since I haven't been here since my initial edit, I am pleased to see the NPOV tag removed.

However all stickers associated with this article are now removed, I'm not going to put any on there in it's current state since I feel that it falls in the category of 'not great but acceptable' and all parties I think can be satisfied with the NPOV representation - others may have different views and that's up to them.

Having said that, I have edited the article recently, changing the way it refers to internationalisation, and removing the specific references to the Large/medium/small XOOPS idea, since I feel that reads a little close to a XOOPS mission statement.

Acceptable, no? - the XOOPS team would be the most valuable contributors to this article since they know what they are talking about, but I would ask them to respect the common ground of wikipedia.

And hopefully we can avoid the talk page getting longer than the article itself... or is it too late? :P

Respectfully: Delivery:435 - Christopher Monahan

BTW you can contact me at

Criticize Api[edit]

Hey one think to criticize Xoops is the poorer documented Api

Removal of ImpressCMS Fork[edit]

Some people are removing the latest XOOPS fork "ImpressCMS" from this article. As this fork is founded by former XOOPS board members, I would say that it is at least as relevant as any other fork. In addition, people removing ImpressCMS in this article are involved in a conflict between former XOOPS board members and the current XOOPS board members. Please do not fight such conflicts on wikipedia. Klungel (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Yet another removal of ImpressCMS as a fork - can we put a stop to this? Skenow (talk) 03:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Can we put stop to the constant harassment by ImpressCMS people trying advertise their product on this XOOPS info. You have ImpressCMS entry, then please keep your ads over there. XOOPS Members don't go to ImpressCMS entry on Wikipedia and modify anything there, as we are not interested in conflicts. We would appreciate the same courtesy in return, and leave us alone here. Michael (talk) 05:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Have it your way, but history is history, not harassment. Skenow (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


"Because XOOPS is released under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL) the growth and development of XOOPS is dependent on the contributions of a worldwide community effort."

That doesn't quite follow, does it? Just because the license is GPL doesn't mean it is dependant on the contributions of a worldwide community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whiskyhead (talkcontribs) 00:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)