User talk:Warrens

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive

Archives
Archive 1 — January / February 2006

Archive 2 — March / April 2006
Archive 3 — May / June 2006
Archive 4 — July / Aug / Sep 2006

My talk page.

Thanks for dropping by, please leave comments at the bottom. I'll reply on this page unless you ask me to reply on yours. :)

Contents

[edit] Outlook Express

I have added again the commercial and non-commercial software related to the Outlook Express page (my own is Outlook Express API). I considered a bad action to take off all these related software. Please explain me the difference between the page you removed and the page you left (insideoutlookexpress, secunia, outlookexpressguru) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.235.100.149 (talk • contribs) .

Wikipedia isn't here for you to advertise your products or services. Please see our policies on Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Thank you. -/- Warren 18:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Zune

Hello Warrens,

Thanks for your note.

A few weeks ago someone (not me) added Zunerama as a useful External Link for the Wikipedia Zune article. After you removed it today, I re-added it. I believe there is strong evidence it is a far more appropriate and useful link than the external link that you chose *not* to remove. Please visit both sites if you wish and make your own analysis based on content, and on ad prominence. And please explain your criteria before removing external links.

I am open to your opinion about appropriate external links; if you feel certain links should be left in and others taken out, please add your justification to the discussion page of the Wikipedia Zune site. Thank you. Otherwise it just looks like you're affiliated with the other sites, which I believe is not the case.

I've copied an excerpt from the Discussion page of the Wikipedia Zune entry below:

(removed, thanks, i saw it -- Warren)

Thanks. Hchute 01:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contributing

Warrens, I apologise for all of the vandalism that I have caused to your encyclopedia, and would like to make it up to you somehow. I know that we got off on a rough start together and I would like to know how I can contribute constructively to your encyclopedia so that you will not have to block me from editing. Please respond on my talk page and tell me how I can help make the encyclopedia better. Thanks.64.126.42.123 03:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows 2000 Service Packs

Hi Warrens,

I am wondering if you may be able to help me.

I just recently added information about Windows 2000 Service Packs on the Windows 2000 article. I wanted to make sure that I had the information correct. My understanding was that once an operating system was phased into Extended Support that no more service packs would be provided for that system. Please tell me on my talk page if this is correct. If it is not, please fill me in on the facts that you have. Thanks Jdlowery 03:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is WGA really a spyware program?

How are you Warrens?

I was wondering if you knew much about the Microsoft WGA program. I know there are a lot of people who think this program is spyware. My understanding was that it could be classified under this category because of how Microsoft destributes it as a critical security update on Windows Update. Not to mention the stories I have heard about the tool phoning home to Microsoft on a regular basis. One other strange thing that I have been hearing from my friend about is people going and validating their PC on the Microsoft Download Center to access a downolad. After the download is complete they run an antispyware program and find that the WGA validation tool has caused a Browser Hijack attempt. I do not know if these stories would be good material for the WGA article here on Wikipedia. I am still searching the web to see if I can find evidence to back some of this up. I was also wondering if you had heard any of these strange stories yourself. Please respond on my talk page and tell me what you think. Jdlowery 02:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vista

User:194.80.32.11 may have a point: some or many of those "new features" may be "features" only because the marketing department broadened the definition. For example, they may have decided that each new theme is a "feature", although most people probably would not look at it that way. I'd say that anything that probably got "interpreted" by a marketing department is suspect. --Scott McNay 05:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks Warrens for deleting the Windows vista criticism on the wikipedia page Mateia Andrew

[edit] Template:History of Windows

Just one question:Why is it necessary to left-align the text in the table cells? Standard table cells (with the TD element) default to left alignment. —Kbolino 01:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the message... it's because the div.NavContent style has a text-align:center in it, and that was inherited down through the table. After giving some thought, it occured to me that we can get the same effect by applying a text-align:left on that div layer, overriding what's in the style sheet, and thus also remove that style from every TD element in the table. I've made that change [1]. Look good to you? -/- Warren 02:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, it seems Internet Explorer and Firefox rendered the page differently. To me, the text was always left-aligned (even without any explicit indication of such); however, after checking the old revision in IE7, I can see why it was a problem. It must an issue with inheritance in Firefox. Either way works for me; I prefer to avoid inline styles like the plague, but article-specific style sheets aren't an option here.—Kbolino 07:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

ugh Found this after your recent edit to the template removing same... SchmuckyTheCat 18:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for the comments! Only two of us (Jdlowery (provided images) and I (wrote the summary of the builds)) have cooperated for that article. I asked you too, remember. (as Deogene) But you did not answer. Anyway, thanks again! - Emir214 12:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows XP Development: Original request

Hello, can you help me improve and expand the section "Development of Windows XP" I created for the Windows XP article? Link here. - Deogene 08:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Please respond on my talk page. - Deogene 08:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Visual styles in Windows Vista

So you think that some presentation from some MS employee (who was charged with preparation of WinHEC presentation), even more that half a year old, is some MORE ACCURATE than real behavior in Windows Vista, which you can see in black and white? Sorry but that doesn't make sense for me. OK, so I removed the citation because it is simply obsolete. But I don't see any logical reason why there should be information which CONTRADICTS with REAL STATE just because of some beta-time presentation. Please at least reply before you do next revert. Thanks. Jakub Horky 09:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I figured out what your problem is. You're confusing "Themes" with "Color and Appearance". These are two different things. Read this blog entry from the Windows shell team -- August 2006; it explains precisely the problem you're having with understanding the difference.
Next, read this. Also from August 2006. How many themes do you count in this dissertation? That's right, four: Aero, Standard, Basic, Classic. In fact, you're going to be extremely hard-pressed to find anyone who will back up your original research that there are five.
Okay? Now are you going to quit with this little crusade of yours? It's damaging the quality and informative value of the article, and I'd like very much for you to stop doing that. -/- Warren 10:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Warrens. I'm sorry but this all I know. I want to assure you that it is also my goal to achieve quality of the article as high as possible. You provided two links, but none is accurate.
I will try to explain some details related to our dissension. Windows Vista has in fact three modes. I don't know what is the official name - I will use just "modes". Nor I know what are official names of inidividual modes.
DWM mode This mode uses transparency, transcluency, compositing etc. You can switch this mode on if you select "Windows Aero" vista color scheme (see below) or "Windows Vista Standard" vista color scheme. This mode is new to Windows Vista. You can fine-tune this mode - you can turn on/off transcluency etc.
Visual styles mode This mode is new to Windows XP. This mode is dependent on the "Themes" service.
Under this mode, there are officially-called Visual styles. Each visual style has its own folder in the %WINDIR%\Resources\Themes folder. They are represented by *.msstyles files. In Windows XP, the only visual style present there - Luna (named internally; oficially it is named "Windows XP style"). In Windows Vista, the is also only one visual style as default - Aero. You can switch this visual style on by selecting "Windows Vista Basic" vista color scheme.
Additionally, each visual style has one or more officially-named Color schemes (I will name it "VS color schemes"). There is only one in Windows Vista's Aero Visual style (internally-named "NormalColor" and oficially named "Default" but this is not visible anywhere) and there are three VS color schemes in Windows XP's Luna Visual style ("NormalColor" - off. "Default (blue)", "Homestead" - off. "Olive Green" and "Metallic" - off. "Silver").
Classic color scheme mode This mode is very old. :)
Under this mode, there are user-defineable officially-named color schemes (I will name it "old color schemes"). There are many in Windows 95/98/2000/Me/XP and there are just six in Windows Vista.
OK. This is basic overview of technical stuff related to this. Some more facts:
There are officially-named Themes. Themes are simple ini files (with .theme extension) - using themes you can switch many appearance-related things with one click. One important thing there: in theme file you can define whether there should be old color scheme used (and thus make the theme Classic color scheme mode) or you can give a path to .msstyles file (and thus make the theme Visual styles mode).
The "Windows Vista Standard" vista color scheme is present in Home Basic O N L Y. You can't find this e.g. in Ultimate. But you can achieve the same behavior by selecting "Windows Aero" and simply switching transcluency off in control panel (and disabling Windows Flip 3D and so on - I don't know whether that can be done in control panel but that's not important).
And the main point. Vista has "Window Color and Appearance" control panel, where you can select "color scheme" (I will name it "vista color scheme"). But it is technically very inexact. Because by selecting vista color scheme, you in fact switch accross modes, visual styles, VS color schemes and old color schemes (in one click). Now I will explain how Vista makes the list of his "color schemes".
First, it enumerates all Visual styles which are present on system. Then it looks at visual style name (located in so-called visual style documentation properties).
If it equals "Aero", it will populate with two entries. First will be dependent on edition - in case of Home Basic, it will add "Windows Vista Standard" (activating DWM mode and disabling some features when selected); in case of all others (probably excluding Starter), it will add "Windows Aero" (activating DWM mode with all features enabled when selected). Additionally it will add second entry named "Windows Vista Basic" (activating Visual styles mode and "Aero" Visual style when selected).
If it doesn't equal "Aero", it will populate with as many entries as the VS color schemes are in Visual style. If you select any of these entries, the Visual styles mode, Visual style and VS color scheme which you've selected will be activated.
Second, it enumerates all old color schemes found in registry (in Vista these schemes can't be added or removed, but there might exist program which can do it - it is relatively simple manipulation with registry values only). In Vista, there are four high-contrast color schemes, and "Windows Classic" for W98 and "Windows Standard" for W2000 appearance. If you select any of these entries, the Classic color scheme mode will be activated, using color scheme you've selected.
So, as you can see, it is even more complicated than how is it described in resources you posted. Additionally, for example, WinHEC presentation contains facts that aren't true. It says that "Windows Vista Standard" vista color scheme is supported in Ultimate.
I'm sorry, but the Wikipedia section, as it was, was simply inconsistent. Why there is all time de-facto talking about vista color schemes but once it is called "visual style", once "mode" and once "theme" (really - look at the version before my last edit)? Why there are two separate vista color schemes - "Windows Aero" and "Windows Vista Standard"? Surely they are the same thing but the latter has only some features disabled. Let's there be these two vista color schemes, but if they are entitled to be there, let's also the "Windows Standard" and "Windows Classic" be there also separate.
I applied my edit once more. And the reason? As you can see, the problem is so complicated, there are so many terms etc., that it should be somehow simplified. And this is exactly what Microsoft did: they simply merged all of this to one list - list of vista color schemes. So before the end user it appears that there are only some color schemes he can pick from. And I think this should be reflected into Wikipedia, instead of some user-hidden modes. (Btw they are three, not four.)
There is only one thing which I set up in the article which isn't grounded on any fact. It is "Visual styles" name for vista color schemes in the article. Actually I don't know how to name it - naming it just "color schemes" sounds old-fashioned, in opposion to "visual styles" which sounds modern and new. So I decided to name it "visual styles" and drop a note explaining that in Windows Vista control panel it is named "Color schemes".
So... I tried to clarify why I re-added my changes third time. Remember that I absolutely want to IMPROVE article quality. Not DAMAGE. Thanks. Jakub Horky 21:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
STOP WITH THIS BULLSHIT.
I mean it.
What you're doing is replacing sourced, accurate, verifiable, and fundamentally correct material, from Microsoft and other reliable sources, with what is fundamentally your opinion. That's called original research, and Wikipedia does not allow that. Okay? The onus is on you to provide reliable sources for your information. NO, saying "use Vista and see for yourself" is not a reliable source of information.... you have to find someone who can be counted on to provide accurate information to say this for you. That's how Wikipedia works. I really don't like having to waste my time reverting your changes because you can't be bothered to follow utterly basic, cornerstone Wikipedia policies on providing sources for your claims! So quit it. -/- Warren 21:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid you even didn't read what I wrote. Again I say, the source IS NOT accurate. And it is not my opinion, but the fact which you or anyone else can simply verify. I want to remove wrong information and replace it with correct one. It is nice you are constantly argumenting with Wikipedia:OR, but realize why this policy was established - because in most branches, it is impossible for others to verify whether it is true or false. But in Windows Vista article? Almost every Wikipedian editing this article has Windows Vista installed and can verify it's true. The policy is there, and I agree with it, but it is meant for Wikipedia in global. But in my opinion, in THIS CONCRETE subject you are abusing it and result is that there are FALSE information in Windows Vista article.
You are leaning against one WinHEC presentation, which I proved you it's inaccurate at least in one fact.
Hmm, it seems I'm wasting my time only there. I wanted to help Wikipedia with my knowledge (repeat: my knowledge of facts, not my opinion) but when it's constantly reverted it doesn't make much sense. What a shame.
Bye Warrens. Jakub Horky 21:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infopath

Why'd you revert my comment on Adobe LiveCycle being a competing product? It's quite useful for someone trying to decide if they want to use InfoPath. Gypsydoctor 15:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello. It's a slippery slope that should be avoided if at all possible... an article about a product shouldn't contain an analysis or lists of other products that are like it. You wouldn't expect to find a list of other colours if you went to the article on the colour blue, for example. We can use categories and lists to collate this information; this results in more balanced information being presented to readers. Thanks. -/- Warren 15:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. Perhaps the category "e-forms" could be used and could include XFORMS etc. as well. Gypsydoctor 05:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely! Wikipedia surely needs better organization and information when it comes to this sort of software. An article describing the category of software, with examples from a couple of popular packages would be good, too. I really don't know much about forms packages so it won't be me doing it. :-) -/- Warren 06:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Goodbye!

Goodbye, Warrens. See more on my user page. - Emir214 12:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows Vista

Please avoid using abusive edit summaries as per Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks and happy editing. — FireFox (talk) 22:04, 04 November 2006

[edit] Thanks!

Aw! I've never got a Mail before! Um, I dunno if this is in the right place or not, do I reply here? Oh well... Yeah, anyway thanks for the message thingy. Image:Smile-tpvgames.gif

By the way, if this isn't the right place just delete this message... if you can. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by O2mcgovem (talk • contribs).

[edit] Virtuti Militari

Luna Santin has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Riding in the eye of the storm, eh? ;) Nice to see somebody making productive edits in there. Cheers. Luna Santin 08:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Thanks for sending me a message. I did not want to copy it actually. Then i thought both are MS products so they should get same type of style. :). --SkyWalker 09:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copy?

Why did you created a copy of Image:Benedelman-spyware-cropped.png by uploading Image:Windows ActiveX security warning (malware).png? I have copied the text and would like to delete the unlinked to image.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Because the other one was protected and featured. I've restored your image, please replace the usage and let me know when I can delete the old one.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
"Image:Benedelman-spyware-cropped.png" was "poorly-named" because it was originally intended as only a temporary crop of Image:Benedelman-spyware-blogspot-2a.png so it would appear more clearly as a thumbnail on the main page, and therefore would have been immediately deleted afterwards. Such images are protected and tagged with Template:M-cropped. However, because you posted Image:Windows ActiveX security warning (malware).png permanently on the Spyware article, I have put that image on the main page instead and deleted the other one. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DRM again

Warren, My edits to others comments, so far as the history shows were to add links, not to change content. I thought them of some help to readers. Do you not?

As for your most recent edits in response to someone moving Dig Rest Mgmt higher in the introduction, I fear you've excised useful information for readers. Wherever the two twrms should be placed in the intro section. I'll try to remember to come back and fill in some of the deleted bits. ww 10:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DirectShow

Why remove DirectShow from category Windows multimedia? Robert K S 13:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Development of Vista

About the original research thing, I didn't look at the source, sorry. I just assumed they would call it Windows Six because Vista is Windows 6.0, so Windows 7.0 wouldn't make sense. PureLegend 19:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] osx

how can you run osx and still go on about windows so much? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spam moi (talk • contribs) .

Read this: User:Warrens/butwhy. -/- Warren 07:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey! Screenshots and the like!

I've dropped you a reply here, and also put forward an idea here here, don't know if you'd be notified so now you know! JamesWeb 16:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Another idea! JamesWeb 23:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Gotofbi

It was just simple page blanking vandalism. Feel free to report him to AIV instead next time. I have blocked him indefinitely. Alphachimp 06:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why have you removed the YI Interwiki?

by Windows Vista article. I put it back. Jiddisch 20:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry about that! I didn't see your edit come through. -/- Warren 21:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] link to British

Hello, when you want to link to the article about something British, please do not link to British, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as United Kingdom, Great Britain or British English by writing out [[United Kingdom|British]] or [[Great Britain|British]]. Regards, Jeff3000 00:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "DVD ripping"

No problem. I just noticed that because of the "Articles with unsourced statements" cat on the article. And you are right Paul did mention that in a couple of places back in September last year. I wonder if that was just bad information on his part or something Microsoft couldn't sort out (legally and/or technically) in time for the launch.

BTW Thanks for catching the vandalism on my user page back at the beginning of the month. AlistairMcMillan 04:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows 95 Development timeline

Hey Warrens, sorry I have not been around much lately. I've just been very busy at work and thus have not had much time for Wikipedia. I wanted to know if you would like to help me out on a Development of Windows 95 timeline to give people more reference to what builds were created up to its initial release in August. Please leave me a message on My talk page if you would like to help me compile some data for the timeline. Thanks. Jdlowery 17:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Windows Task Scheduler 5472.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows Task Scheduler 5472.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Alex (T|C|E) 00:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Screenshots

I've been updating screenshots of Windows Vista throughout Wikipedia. I tagged a few of the obsolete ones for deletion. Let me know if you need any more screenshots taken from RTM. :-) — Alex (T|C|E) 02:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weasel words and Apple vs Microsoft

I appreciate your advice and appreciate they were well intentioned. However, I didn't add the words you were concerned about, I was merely the last person to edit the article. The phrase you're concerned about was added in 2004 by Iluvcapra.

My apologies for replying here rather than in my talk page, but there's some kind of networking problem that prevents me from editing large amounts of text from my home DSL connection. Squiggleslash 17:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 logo.png

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 logo.png. 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 Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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. Yamla 03:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup-spam

My understanding is that, whatever the wording, the purpose of putting the template there in notoriously spam-prone articles is to alert readers and editors to watch out for it and remove it. Daniel Case 06:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Microsoft Update

Microsoft Update is not the same as Windows Update, nor is it a sequel for. Can you please branch the two articles?

[edit] Lead

Thanks for your comments and your last words of advice. I ought to confide in you that usually when I slap a tag on an article I know the metapidians there will be alarmed, but in my view lead paragraphs are getting out of control here on the whole. Very often I don't know enough about the subject to wikify it and am simply prodding the bear out of hibernation kind of thing, not vilifying it. Some editors see no problem with their long intros like you with microsoft, which is OK in this case, but I would say most long intros are not, conformity to WP:LEAD is ignored totally. In fact the WP:LEAD page has very little participance for a guideline page. I encourege you to join our new wikiproject [2] to keep keep an eye on us, we will make mistakes too. Thanks again. FrummerThanThou 05:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio on History of Microsoft Windows

You said: "If you're going to take it upon yourself to do something like this, then at least have the courtesy to come up with a reasoning that's actually true. Your work with identifying copyvio images has been very helpful, but please be more careful."

When I removed the image from that page, there was not a detailed fair-use rationale for the image's use on History of Microsoft Windows. This may be the case now, I have not checked. --Yamla 21:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/a/r/User_talk%7EWarrens_9305.html"