Talk:Avidemux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 2 September 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] deleted in german Wikipedia

I was tempted to put this to the article, but removed it - its better read in the discussion at first I think:

[edit] Curious

The german Avidemux entry has been deleted Reason for the request for deletion was: "Begründung:Werbetext für ein Softwareprodukt zweifelhafter Relevanz. Eine Verbreitung wie sie zum Beispiel bei VirtualDub vorhanden ist kann ich hier nicht erkennen. Aber vor allem ist es purer Werbebläh. --Weissbier 09:49, 4. Mai 2007 (CEST)" That means "Reason:Advertising text for a softwareproduct of doubtable relevance. A widespread distrubution like par example VirtualDub has unfortunately I cannot see in this case. But above all it is pure advertisingbleh." Last Avidemux-entry at de.wikipedia:

  • the page fetched from googlecache: Avidemux
  • Locally hosted version (Googlecache-Entries removed) in case googlecache is refreshed: Avidemux

Though 12:0 votes for keeping it was deleted "Begründung: Im Artikel stand, das es sich um eine Software handelt und was sie kann. Das war alles! Damit ist keine wie auch immer geartete enzyklopädische Relevanz erkennbar. Dazu wurde auch in der Diskussion nichts beigetragen. --He3nry Disk. 10:16, 17. Mai 2007 (CEST)" "Reason: The article just said that it is a software and what it can do. That was all! In this way was no encyclopedian relevance visible. The discussion also did not add to it."

[edit] Future plans - is this necessary?

I don't think that the "Future plans" section is appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Firstly, users interested in Avidemux development can see all these details elesewhere (mailing list with patches, web forum, bug tracker), this is just general info page about the Avidemux application, i.e. what it is and what it can do, not a development info. Secondly, the "Proposed (but unconfirmed or undecided) features" section is just pure speculation that's not based on anything real. It's just fantasy. Anyone can ask for any feature in Avidemux and then, without getting any answer, put it the "Future plans" section, cunfusing the readers who may think that these are planned features. That's pretty much what this section represents (random suggestions from various users without getting answers from the developers). Only Mean or other Avidemux developers know what they plan to do. And only when they say it's planned, it can be considered a planned feature. And even then, it may not belong here, in Wikipedia. J. M. 21:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Also, I do not believe phrases such as "Some people think..." and "...boasts such features..." are entirely NPOV. – Glenn Seto 21:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] link down

the homepage http://www.avidemux.org/ appears to be down. 71.131.134.213 00:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Works here. But it is down from time to time. Anyway, the main page is really www.avidemux.org, the avidemux.sourceforge.net link is just one of the three Avidemux mirrors (not more important than e.g. the primary fixounet.free.fr/avidemux mirror). So I'm going to change the external links section to make it clear that the SourceForge.net mirror is not the main Avidemux address that deserves to be put at the top of the list, I'm also going to fix the old forum and wiki links. —J. M. 01:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Desync issues

I don't know if it worth mentionning it, but I had huge desync problems with Avidemux. I think it lies in the way Avidemux handle NTSC source 23.976 played as 29.976 (with 3:2 Pulldown), it's not doing the job correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.48.150.95 (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Broken Link - OpenDML

The OpenDML link, next to AVI, under "Supported input formats" is broken. Reason is due to website redesign at Matrox.com . I couldn't find the new URL to fix it. 85.228.120.179 (talk) 20:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This program is crap

I think known issues should be added to this wiki. The thing is so buggy and its interface is so obscure that pretty much any other program would be better than this piece o' crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.205.229 (talkcontribs) 23:17, 3 March 2008