Talk:Universal Image Format/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Advantages of UIF & MagicDiSC

(Advertising claims by user 84.73.254.103 deleted - jesup 16:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC))
84.73.254.103 15:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What Wikipedia Is

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. I think you can learn a lot by reading Help:Contents/Policies and guidelines and especially Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Talk pages are for discussion of the editing of the main page (not as an alternate content page). Wikipedia is an online Encyclopedia, and promotion is inappropriate (whether self-promotion or promotion of someone or something you like, or criticism of someone or something you don't like). Content must be "encyclopedic", and must maintain a "Neutral Point Of View" (see WP:NPOV). It also must be verifiable - no original research (WP:OR) is allowed, nor personal opinion. I suggest reading some of those, and looking at other pages and the history, so you can see how the writing and editing process works. I also suggest registering a username. Note: if you look down, you'll see "Sign your name" - on Talk pages, at the end of a comment, click on that or by hand add four ~'s. Like this: jesup 18:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Advert

I just put the advert tag. This article screams useless buzzwords, like how is a proprietary format universal? Pick one. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 03:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

IP 84.73.254.103 has been removing advert and the discussion of it. jesup 16:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know, because they chose to call their proprietary format "Universal" in the hopes that everyone would use it? There's the name, and the facts... that they perhaps don't mesh as well as they should is a matter for their marketing department. We're just reporting the facts. There is a distinct lack of information on this format apart from the creator's website, and there is at least one other format with the same name which may merit inclusion, al least as a note. [1] -- Grim Revenant 05:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Obviously, I was pointing out what Grim has noted - it's an oxymoron, but that is not why it is tagged advert but instead was a commentary about one of the reasons it looks like an ad. As for Grim's link, I would think that based on other articles I have seen, an IETF standard should be first with the closed source software being at the other end of a disambig page. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 12:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

removed senseLESS POV like: 'HOW can MicroSoft be a GLOBAL Player?' - please choose Micro or GLOBAL! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.73.254.103 (talk • contribs).

Please sign comments with ~~~~. Your comment makes no sense, nor does it answer the reasons for adding {{advert}} made by RevRagnarok. If you make a coherent argument on the issue, we can move forward and resolve the issue. jesup 16:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, "rv for reasons I've stated before" is disingenuous - the "reason" stated before was nonsensical, and the same as the comment above. jesup 16:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I put it back, again. Anon IP, read WP:3RR before removing it. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 14:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I am not putting it back due to 3RR restrictions. Jesup can. Administrators notified. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 02:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC) Note: 6 revert notice on 3RR notice board has been archived here. -RevRagnarok, 5 Dec 06

The Advert Tag Discussion Goes HERE

One anon IP removes the tag, six times, gets banned, and 7 hours later another comes in and reverts with nonsense comment nonsens {{advert}} removed - discussion with deafly wikipedians & such a high stresslevel is an absolutely no-go!. If you revert the advert tag without discussion here, myself or other WP editors will revert it back. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 12:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. Out of my hands. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 13:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

discussions with deafly wikipedians is totally stupid!

how can be an intelligent VHDL-designer with such a high stress-level so deafly? - MicroSoft is the NAME! and GLOBAL is not part of it... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.214.29.174 (talk • contribs).

The word Microsoft does not appear in this article anywhere. What do they have to do with this article? Do they say it is or is not an advertisement? (And please, if you don't want to log in, at least sign your comments.) We are discussing whether or not this article is an advertisement. The way you are vehemently removing the advertisement tag makes us think (us being myself and at least one other editor) that you are a corporate shill violating multiple WP policies, at a minimum WP:OR, WP:OWN, WP:3RR, and WP:SPAM. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 12:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Here we go again...

Again, an anonymous IP comes in and starts playing UIF-fanboy. NPOV warnings and a Disadvantages section are not vandalism. Unlike others, I will not break the 3RR rule, but that doesn't matter, because when another veteran editor comes in and reverts, the IP will revert again, with a nonsense change note like "spam & duplicates removed!" when they are instead removing NPOV flags, etc. 84.73.254.103 (talk • contribs • logs) seems to have rebooted their cable modem to become 80.218.7.212 (talk • contribs • logs) since they both have the same nonsense notes. At that point, somebody can feel free to make a note for an admin on the 3RR board. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 04:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

And here is another nonsense edit. It truly seems that the IP (who refuses to discuss things on this page, just complain that an admin has protected the page) doesn't get my original comment. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 12:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
based on RevRagnarok Talk Contrib nonsense & STUPID argumentation! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uifan (talk • contribs).

Article semi-protected again

Note to the IP. Please try to create an account and follow wikipedia policies and guidelines such as Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia is not a battleground. Please discuss first and avoid edit warring and try first to reach a concensus here in the talk page. Cheers -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 10:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

u really mean discussion based on RevRagnarok's Talk Contrib NONsense & STUPID arguments is not wasting of time? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.218.7.212 (talk • contribs).
Could you explain further where the nonsense and stupidity are in their arguments? -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 11:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
u can take a look here: discussions with deafly wikipedians is totally stupid! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.218.7.212 (talk) 12:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC).
I've read the whole page actually and i get the following:
So where we are now? If it was another admin he'd have blocked you and the range of IP's you've been using. I decided to act softly on this as to explain to you that you have to assume good faith and discuss your issues calmly and gently. Nobody in Wikipedia could ever win an argument by debunking others and reverting non-stop. I am still leaving you the option of discussing your issues here by trying to convince other contributors the way you can. If you don't feel able to do that by yourselves (you may think other contributors are bullshitting you, just file a case at WP:RfC.
P.S. Please help us by signing your comments or maybe by signing up. Maybe that would help your case somehow. Cheers -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 14:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
after triggering you explicitly to RevRagnarok's NONsense & STUPID arguments with one word Bullshit i must determine you do NOT see RevRagnarok's Bullshit and my given answers, therefore it doesn't make sense to open a case at WP:RfC... 80.218.7.212 15:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
The problem is that you still do not present arguments apart from using bold format to what you call nonsense & stupid arguments. Indeed RfC is the right place for your case 'till this moment. -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 15:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
if YOU really do NOT see RevRagnarok's Bullshit and my given answers, then indeed it doesn't make sense to open a case at WP:RfC... 194.230.146.2 17:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
First, w/ whom i am talking to? Who proves that you are the same editor as 80.218.7.212? A Request for CheckUser may give some answers to this same question and that may lead to a block. So please, sign up for god's sake.
Second, Which given answers you pretend you have given me so far? Develop your ideas and arguments so contributors would understand what they are.
Third, i am just an administrator and would not enter or decide the RfC outcome. So, yes, still the best option is to refer to RfC. Otherwise, it would become trolling as per WP:TROLL. -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 18:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I think the anon-IP finally signed up for an account under the ID User:Uifan. I still can make no sense to any of the statements or checkin summaries posted by this presumed single user. jesup 22:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
do you really think? - and WHAT do you think about RevRagnarok's Bullshit? 195.112.95.126 19:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Less is more

If anything, I think that shortening this article would improve it. Looking at the article for Direct Access Archive, a near equivalent file format, all that it consists of is a short description conveying the relevant information and a link to the creator's page. As previously mentioned, there is another (IETF) format which shares the Universal Image Format name, so that should probably be mentioned too. I don't think that there needs to be much discussion about the format, because we should be avoiding original research, and web searches turn up little to nothing that isn't just a rehash of the info from the creator's website.

I'll see if I can bash something together if this sounds all right? ― GrimRevenant 07:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. Then we can get rid of the ad tag. jesup 12:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Done. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 15:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Page protection

I've protected the page because of the continued reverting and the 3RR complaint. I don't want to keep it protected if you're all wanting to edit it, however. What would your preference be for how to deal with the anon/new account reverting? SlimVirgin (talk) 17:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

For archival purposes, 2nd 3RR here. Anyway, I agree with Grim and jesup above (Less is more) about making the article concerning the standard UIF with a blurb about this proprietary one. I assume somebody can put one together in Universal Image Format/Sandbox until we agree and then request the protected page to be updated with consensus. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 15:15, 25 December 2006 (UTC)


  • RockMFR has stated: nothing in this article can be construed as advertising
  • with other words: RevRagnarok is bullshiting us with his stupid arguments
  • conclusion: STOP RevRagnarok for bullshiting Wikipedia!
  • and just 4 archive: 3RR was BROKEN by RevRagnarok

80.218.7.225 23:21, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Who is "RockMFR" - I searched this page for 'Rock' and see nothing? Either way, at least 3 other logged in and experienced editors and/or administrators agree with me, so just read WP:SOCK and then WP:NPA and get over it. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 00:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I came across this article at Recent Changes. I first reverted an edit that had the summary of "vandalism removed"; however, that edit just seemed like it was blanking half the article and adding some useless link. It was tagged with the advert template, but I didn't see any reason for the tag to be on the article. I am not even aware of what the current debate is about. --- RockMFR 20:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Converting UIF Files

I believe the page should mention that the MagicDisc freeware is able to convert UIF to ISO. Just tried it. 82.229.209.33 10:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../u/n/i/Talk%7EUniversal_Image_Format_Archive1_68c5.html"