Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Acid2/archive3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:04, 10 January 2009 [1].
Acid2[edit]
- Nominator(s): Remember the dot
- previous FAC (09:16, 23 August 2008)
References have been strengthened, prose has been improved. I think this article is now ready for the featured article star. —Remember the dot (talk) 00:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have moved my original oppose and subsequent discussion to the talk page, as it was getting rather long and cluttering up this FAC. I will be traveling over the next few days. If the article is not significantly different from this version my oppose still stands; otherwise, please feel free to ignore it. I'll revisit the article when I get a chance. BuddingJournalist 02:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments -
- What makes the following reliable sources?
http://www.root.cz/texty/hakon-wium-lie-css-was-created-to-save-html/- Technology web site that provides some basic biographical information about Håkon Wium Lie. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The article now cites his biography page on his company's web site instead. —Remember the dot (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Technology web site that provides some basic biographical information about Håkon Wium Lie. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1137799947&count=1
- http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/
- http://www.thecounter.com/
- Well-known site that provides web browser usage statistics. This reference is used to back up the assertion that Internet Explorer 6 was the most widely used web browser at the time of Acid2's release, which is common knowledge among web developers and easily verified by any of the sites listed in the Usage share of web browsers article. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/alpha.html
- Written by Mark 'Tarquin' Wilton-Jones, a web developer. Used to back up the easily verifiable statement that Internet Explorer 6 did not support alpha transparency and Internet Explorer 7 does. Would you prefer that we used a statement from Microsoft instead? —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://kilianvalkhof.com/2008/css-xhtml/understanding-css-positioning-part-1/- Web development tutorial that provides visual examples of various positioning options. You can get the same information from any web development site or book; this one seemed to be the most clear. It is certainly more clear to the average reader than the actual technical specification. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://weblog.timaltman.com/archive/2006/07/19/tims-opera-bits-v11
- Written by Tim Altman, who does quality assurance work for the makers of the Opera web browser. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2007/06/opera-mini-4-beta
- All this reference is doing is providing a screenshot of what you can see for yourself at the Opera Mini Simulator. This secondary reference is useful for if your browser does not support Java. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://simonwillison.net/2006/May/11/operamini/#c33322
- http://marketshare.hitslink.com/default.aspx
- http://www.snailshell.de/blog/
- http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/1129
- http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/172375
- Written by Claudio Santambrogio, one of the developers of the Opera web browser. —Remember the dot (talk) 22:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://diary.braniecki.net/2006/04/12/meet-mr-face/- The article no longer uses this reference. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/bz/archives/017302.html- The article no longer uses this reference. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://web.archive.org/web/20060717122922/http://macintalk.com/index.php?id=136
http://operawatch.com/news/2006/12/wii-browser-passes-the-acid2-test.html- The article no longer uses this reference. —Remember the dot (talk) 20:17, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://suplido.com/joel/2007/06/15/take-your-browser-on-an-acid2-test/- The article no longer uses this reference. —Remember the dot (talk) 20:17, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Current ref 17 (HTML 4.01...) is lacking a publisher.Current ref 51 (K Desktop...) is lacking a publisherCurrent ref 52 (The Acid2 test..) is lacking a publisher(And what makes this a reliable source?)Current ref 57 (KDE 3.5.2...) is lacking a publisherCurrent ref 67 (Baron, David...) is lacking a publisher
- Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. I did not evaluate the non-English sources. I'll note that some of the missing publishers were pointed out in the first FAC, and are still missing now. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- All the references you mentioned now include publisher information. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image review - Can you show me where it says on this website or elsewhere that the Acid2 images are released into the PD. I couldn't find the statement. Thanks. Awadewit (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The permission is now under OTRS ticket #2321205. —Remember the dot (talk) 18:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Excellent - now let's get down to the nitty gritty.
Oppose on criterion 3
- File:Acid2 reference.png - This image should link to the HTML page, not directly to the PNG file per WP:IUP.
- Done. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Original Acid2 smiley.png - This image needs the OTRS ticket and needs to be released by its screenshot author.
- Taking a screenshot does not give you any more copyright to an image than copying an image from a web site. Please stop listing me as the "author" of these screenshots. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Safariacid2.png - This image has no author, date, or source information.
- It does now. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Ieacid2.png - This image needs to list the author of the screenshot and that author must release the rights.
- File:Ie7acid2.png - This image needs to list the author of the screenshot and that author must release the rights.
- File:Acid2 NS72.png - Since the uploader and the author of the screenshot are not the same, we need a explicit release by the author.
- File:Firefoxacid2.png - This image needs to list the author of the screenshot and that author must release the rights.
- File:Opera 8.0 Acid2.png - The author of the screenshot needs to release the rights.
- File:Opera 8.54 Acid2.png - The author of the screenshot needs to release the rights.
- File:Konqueror 3.4.1 Acid2.png - The author of the screenshot needs to release the rights.
- File:Acid2 in Opera Mini 4.png - The author of the screenshot needs to release the rights.
- File:Acid2iPod.png - The source image does not match the uploaded image - something is amiss.
- The "source image" is just a link to the Acid2 test. Did you use an iPod to view the test, as the screenshot illustrates? —Remember the dot (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Netsurf-1.2-acid2.png - The source link does not work. Is this a self-made image by "Ian Hickson"?
- As the article states, Ian Hickson was the principal author of Acid2. What do you mean, "The source link does not work"? I just checked it and it is functioning correctly for me. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, a lot of little problems can add up. These should be easy to fix, though. Awadewit (talk) 02:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.