User talk:Knismogenic

Knismogenic, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Knismogenic! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

Hello, I'm Codename Lisa. I noticed that you made a change to an article, SkyDrive, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Codename Lisa (talk) 07:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lisa, I'm Knismogenic. I noticed that you made a change to an article, SkyDrive, to revert the current version of SkyDrive 17.0.2006.0314 I entered, back to an earlier version, 16.4.8019.827, because I wasn't able to provide a "source" that the latest version was 17.0.2006.0314. This isn't practical, given that Microsoft do not publish a changelog/release notes for SkyDrive. If you download/install/use the SkyDrive app, the version shown in the "About" dialog is 17.0.2006.0314 - how am I meant to "cite" this!? An internet search for "SkyDrive 17.0.2006.0314" reveals that 17.0.2006.0314 became available to download on March 19 2013 - this information is confirmed from a number of software download sites (softpedia, majorgeeks, techspot, betanews) who all agree on March 19. It is therefore with a high degree of certainty that the current version of SkyDrive 17.0.2006.0314, and was released on March 19 2013. Given that Microsoft do not provide release notes, or state the latest version number on their download it, I did not believe it appropriate to "cite" any one of the numerous download sites for SkyDrive where 17.0.2006.0314 is listed with the date, as this would have given undue prominence/advertising to a particular download site. It is not normally required to provide a citation for a program's version number where there is no changelog/release notes provided by the software vendor themselves. Please consider reversing your decision, based on the above, and on your own research to confirm that the latest version of SkyDrive is 17.0.2006.0314 and was released on March 19 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 08:57, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello again.

I know who you are! After all, I was the one to post the first message, right? What I don't know is why you posted the reply in my talk page instead of posting here. I assumed perhaps it was not out of a love for going forth and back and so I brought back the whole discussion here. (Still, if you wish to revert this act, please be my guest.) On the other hand, if you desperately wanted my attention, {{Talkback}} was the way to go.
In Wikipedia, everything that is contested or is likely to be contested needs a source. Contributions without source are challenged or deleted. What I said was our policy and I do not see an exception for software versions in it. (In fact, version number vandalism is not unseen in Wikipedia.)
Citations from credible software centers like Download.com, Softpedia or FileHippo are acceptable. In this case, citation from Softpedia page solves the problem. As for advertisement, do not worry: As long as they do not come to Wikipedia, they are no barring issue.
You changed the wrong infobox! Judging by your message, you meant to change the version number of SkyDrive for Windows app but you ended up changing the version number of SkyDrive.com, the website. The infobox which you are looking for is further down the article and it already says "17.0.2006.0314".

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa, "What I don't know is why you posted the reply in my talk page instead of posting here" ..because in your message to me, you said: "If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. " :P

I do accept that I edited the info box for skydrive.com instead of for the Windows app, however, the currently listed latest version of skydrive.com is also incorrect! - it is NOT "16.4.8019.827", it is infact "17.0.2535.0327", going off the instructions in the corresponding citation "The SkyDrive.com version number can be obtained by visiting http://skydrive.live.com, select "View source" using a supported web browser, and searching for this version number." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knismogenic (talk • contribs) 11:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thanks for the correct version number and thanks for the note about my message. (The message refers to general inquiries, future mistakes and future cases, not replies, but I guess I can add an adverb of time to it for clarification.)

By the way, please do not forget to sign your messages by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa, given that we now seem to be in agreement that the current version of SkyDrive.com is "17.0.2535.0327" (by following the process indicated on the wiki article, of viewing the source of skydrive.com and extracting the version number from that), would you be happy for me to update the skydrive.com wiki accordingly? The only issue is that whilst this confirms the current version of skydrive.com as "17.0.2535.0327", (the reference being the source code itself), there is no way of knowing the exact release date of this current version of skydrive.com! ...suggestions? Knismogenic (talk) 08:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am the wrong person to answer this question because you see, the version number of SkyDrive.com is an unprecedented case. Nowhere in Wikipedia we supply version numbers for websites (because of their fluid nature and the fact that these numbers are of no significance to the end user). However, in case of former Windows Live websites like SkyDrive, one user, who has contributed significantly to these articles, have added these version numbers. I think it is a futile practice (for the two reasons above) but Wikipedia is perfectly happy as long as there is a source.

You can check Liveside.net to see if there is a source or ask User:Damaster98 if he knows one. If you could not find a source for the release date, you can drop it until you find one.

Do not worry about me reverting. I reverted once, so I won't do it again. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MB Source in Comodo Internet Security

Hello again

I see you also made an unreferenced contribution in Comodo Internet Security article. Well, I checked Comodo website and it did not verify what you added. Comodo.com offers 144 MB packages containing both IA-32 and x64 variant of CIS. Where did you get the sizes that you added in the article?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 11:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa, The physical file size of Comodo Internet Security 6.1.276867.2813 x32 (http://downloads.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/1000/standalone/cispremium_installer_x86.exe) is 49.9MB

The physical file size of Comodo Internet Security 6.1.276867.2813 x64 (http://downloads.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/1000/standalone/cispremium_installer_x64.exe) is 58.4MB— Preceding unsigned comment added by Knismogenic (talk • contribs) 11:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. That's strange. The link that I receive is http://downloads.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/2000/standalone/cispremium_installer.exe. It is 144 MB. I also checked FileHippo mirror and it also gives me the same size. Where did you get those links? Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 04:21, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lisa. That is indeed strange! Given the names and sizes of the respective files, I suspect yours is perhaps a "combined" x86 AND x64 installer where as mine were the separate x86 and x64 installers. Anyway, these links can be found on Neowin Knismogenic (talk) 06:27, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is combined. Comodo has been issuing the package for a while and I can (and do) install it on both x64 and IA-32 computers. But since Neowin is your source, your information is reliable... at least, until the version number changes. But when a new version number comes out —

We will worry about it later. Good luck for now. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]