Talk:Panorama Tools/Archive 2

SourceForge recommended

"The PanoToolsNG mailing list and wiki are the recommended forms by the SourceForge project[2] for support and to connect with the active PanoTools community. This group continues to discuss and promote the use of Panorama Tools."

This content is not factual. The PanoToolsNG group hasn't had a Panorama Tools related post to the list in months. The group covers all aspects of panorama photography. This page should be about Helmut's offering and other resources that are associated. John Spikowski

It's actually completely factual and it seems clear you know this to be true also since you omited the reference I also placed in the edit. The reference is as follows:

"Panorama Tools: SourceForge" (HTML). SourceForge. 2007-05-03. Retrieved 2007-05-03. Questions and answers about usage of the various tools and front-ends belong on the PanoToolsNG mailing-list, you might want to consult the PanoTools wiki before posting. There is a panotools-devel mailing list for questions regarding compiling the source and developing it further. The PanoTools wiki aims to be the definitive reference for Panorama Tools. It contains a lot of usage documentation for the tools hosted here on sourceforge. {{cite web}}: External link in |quote= (help)

It's an important citation that references the claim of recommendation. I'm not exactly sure how this could be debated since the above comments clearly show the developers themselves recommend those links alone and not the site which editor John Spikowski operates. Roguegeek (talk) 14:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

The PanoToolsNG group was created in July 2006 which currently has about 50 active posting members. Their group web site is stale and the wiki is being used for everything other then what was intended. I really don't want to spend a month fighting about one line of text. The developer for the Panorama Tools software is Helmut. The current group modifing his software is planning to change the name and charge for it. I don't think it should remain on Sourceforge if it's going to become a commercial product. The PanoTools group has been active for over four years now and operates in the same manor as the Panoguide or Max Lyons panorama portals. I don't think this is news to anyone. John Spikowski 18:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

It may or may not be news to readers of the article. Verifiability is a core policy and it clearly states that attribution is required for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged. Any material that is challenged and for which no source is provided may be removed by any editor. I'm not saying the link could be removed, but the claim can and, therefore, am still asking for a source on the claims you are placing into the article. This needs to be address in the same way I cited sources for the other link. I'm going to assume good faith in that when you removed the tag without addressing the issue, the policy simply was not understood. A second edit doing the same could be considered a bad-faith edit, though. I'm going to re-apply the tag now and hope that a reliable, third-party published source can be obtained on this issue. Roguegeek (talk) 23:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability of panotools.info

Please explain why the site panotools.info is notable for the Panorama Tools Software. As far as I can tell there is less connection to the software then Max Lyons Forums (who is an actual PanoTools developer and has >1000 users) or panoguide.com. Also John Spikowski stated on March 11th, 2007 in the forum at panotools.info:

I don't see any reason to have a Panorama Tools forum as it would be treated just like any other panorama software we use and discuss here.

Also the focus of the news is that wide that I can not see any connection to the PanoTools software. --Wuz 11:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Please tell us why a new group should have so many references on this page. You refer to "the developers" for approval when this is two or three people. The PanoTools NG group is a general panorama photography group and developement issues are not allowed or discussed on this list. The Panorama Tools software continues to be actively developed by the original author and all other efforts are handled on Sourceforge. The Hugin group is the open list for Panorama Tools descussions. I think this issue should be revisited after the Berkeley conference when Helmut can be asked directly what his plans are for further Panorama Tools development and what copyright issues may prevent further external development efforts. John Spikowski 16:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with keeping both in the article under the external links. Roguegeek (talk) 17:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

But still a reason would be interesting to hear. panotools.info is not related to the PanoTools software. It just used the name promote the website. If the external links should also show any panorama related forum also panoguide, Max Lynos, the QTVR list, IVRPA, etc. should be added. Tu quoque is in my eyes not a good reason. --Wuz 17:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This page is about Helmut's Panorama Tools software that he continues to offer on his web site. The PanoTools group supported the software while Helmut was being threatened by Ipix. The PanoTools group supported this effort for 3 1/2 years till the SourceForge effort got under way and the Hugin group was formed. The PanoTools group has moved on and supports all panorama software and hardware offerings as the use of Panorama Tools is minimal. Joost of PTGUI has also moved on and only supports the pano12.dll for historical reasons. Both the orginal PanoTools group and the forked NG group offer end user peer support for the library. Development issues are redirected to SourceForge or the Hugin group as this is where it is being supported.

The PanoTools and PanoToolsNG groups are in the external links section for users of the software looking peer end user support. If the PanoTools group is deleted here then the PanoToolsNG (like) group should also be removed as well. John Spikowski 19:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The mailinglist of panotools.org includes at least 8 developers (Bruno Postle, Pablo d'Angelo, Daniel M. German, Jim Watters, Thomas Niemann, Joost Nieuwenhuijse, Fulvio Senore and myself) [1] of the PanoTools software to give peer support. As far as I can tell no developer can be found on your closed forum so this makes it not different from dpreview or any other general photography page and worth then Max Lynos or Apples QTVR list where at least some developers can be found. The question is still: Why should panotools.info be in the list for the PanoTools software and not all the other panorama pages as well? --Wuz 20:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Reasons

• The PanoTools group was established well before the NG group and maintains a professional looking website that's kept current and has a 2500+ visitors a day. (10,000+ pages / per day) It is well index in the search engines after being active for over 4 years.
• The PanoTools wiki was created on and by the PanoTools group and remains dedicated to panorama topics. (unlike the NG forked copy that has been a front end to the group site, group policy manual, product specific documentation and anything else a online scratch pad would be used for.)
• The developers you mention spend most of their time on the SourceForge, Hugin, PTGui lists. The NG Yahoo list is nothing more then a Photographer chat list made up of 50 (or less) active posting members with 1300+ lurkers or people that have moved on after they found the answer to what they were looking for.
• The NG group moderators are masters of wasting peoples time with poor management and promises made that never materialize. I have never seen a Verein or any organization of a group take 8 months with so little group interest or participation. If the photographers wanted to be part of an established organization, they would have join the IVRPA by now.

John Spikowski 21:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

So which of the above reasons qualifies your page to be included in the Panorama Tools article and how is this related to the software? --Wuz 21:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Turn your server off and you would be surprised how little your site would be missed. It's basically built from our resources anyways. John Spikowski 00:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Conflicts of Interest

Having kept track of this article now for quite some time it is blatantly obvious that several of the editors on here are having problems under WP:COI. If you are directly related to any website you should not be pushing to add it to any page on this site - it is a conflict of interest and leads to the over the top arguments that have plagued this page. Please can all the editors on here realise their own biases and try to not promote them? For an article about a niche subject (this is a niche subject) this article seems to suffer its fair share of silly revert wars, petty arguing and other similar behaviour.-Localzuk^(talk) 21:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The PanoTools group has had one line of text in this document since July of 2006. At times it only consisted of a couple words. Thomas (wuz) will not stop editing/deleting the PanoTools groups reference. (his hobby I guess) He maintains the NG site and will not rest until his site is the only panorama resource on the web. It's sad but true. John Spikowski 21:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I was actually referring to both of you. John, you are a group administrator the panotools.info site and as such you should not be posting any links to it on here - many would see that as a form of spamming. Wuz (Thomas) as you seem to be the admin for panotools.org you should not be posting any links to that site on here. Can you not see the reason why? Between the pair of you, you have added and removed each others sites quite a few times. It is not good for the encyclopedia so I would ask that both of you stop posting links to the sites - if either are really that popular, someone else will add them. Please take a look at the WP:COI and WP:EL guides. Until then, I am going to remove both until someone else adds them.-Localzuk^(talk) 11:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a citation from http://panotools.sourceforge.net/ in "News 12th July 2006 - Mailing lists": The old PanoTools User list has been abandoned by most of the regular contributors due to management issues. The recommended mailing list for support is now the PanoToolsNG yahoo list. To clarify the situation, these are now the relevant lists for discussion of Panotools and related software: - PanoToolsNG: Questions and answers about usage of the various tools and front-ends - panotools-devel: For questions and discussion regarding compiling the source and developing it further. - Panotools-List: For discussion of the management issues of the PanoToolsNG group and the wiki.

I think only the first two are of relevance for the wikipedia article, so I add those two. Einemnet 14:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

External Links

For those who are interested, this section was brought about by myself due to the conflict of interest shown by several of this article's editors and external links. More details can be found in the archives.-Localzuk^(talk) 18:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the mailing lists as they are not acceptable per our WP:EL rules. If they were sites with information then that would be ok, but mailing lists, forums and other such sites aren't allowed. Cheers, Localzuk^(talk) 14:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I have added an external wiki separate from the SourceForge project, but recommended by the developers. It's filled with content that seems to be updated very regularly by both users and developers. This link conforms with the WP:EL policy and if you plan on removing, I would really appreciate proper reasoning into why instead of simply saying "not acceptable as per...". Also keep in mind that I'm not directly associated with either group and consider myself a neutral party. Roguegeek (talk) 23:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

There is only one partial page about the Panorama Tools software in the NG wiki. I can't see how this multi-purpose wiki is related to Panorama Tools. John Spikowski 00:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

John, your attachment to this subject does not allow for you to remove this as per the discussion. We need editors outside editors for this, but your opinion is clearly understood by everyone here. I'm really looking to see what Localzuk has to say about this. I want to hear him before action is taken. Roguegeek (talk) 00:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Do not add links to private interest groups that have nothing to do with Panorama Tools. The NG moderators have plastered the Wikipedia with their links in multiple pages that have nothing to do with their panorama photographer chat list. John Spikowski 00:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

As I've already stated, your obviously biased opinion and close ties with the subject of the article make needing outside editors opinions much more necessary for a resolution. Roguegeek (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

You said yourself that you were waiting to hear back from >User talk:Localzuk before making any changes to the external links section. Why are you adding back what was removed by him? Please remove your edit till this is resolved. John Spikowski 02:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Why play these games? Show me where I said that. You wont be able to because, as it states above, I made the edit first and now await feedback from constructive editors such as Localzuk. I'm not going to just remove an edit I made without neutral feedback, especially since I find it to be a completely valid and valuable addition to the article. Let the neutral editors decide if it violates WP:EL. These games you're playing, they're just distracting now and counterproductive into making this article a good article. They're also obviously getting the attention from editors that could probably care less about the subject. I ask you to please tread lightly right now and please assume good faith. Roguegeek (talk) 02:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

The PanoToolsNG group should create their own PanoTools Next Generation page and tell the world all the great things they do there. This page is about Helmut's Panorama Tools software and not about generic panorama portals and the services they provide. If the NG group can submit their external links here then the Panoguide, Max Lyons forum and a hand full of others are just as appropriate. John Spikowski 03:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

This is exactly what we're trying to avoid here. Wikipedia is not a place to advertise anything like you are promoting above with a special article about it. Those other links you are suggesting may or may not add value to this article as well depending on compliance with WP:EL. Roguegeek (talk) 03:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

The wiki seems to be a comprehensive and useful resource for the PanoTools - with a large number of articles. It is acceptable as an external link but not as a reference. John Spikowski, your behaviour is very disruptive and proves that you cannot present an unbiased view to this article, either stop editing in such a POV manner trying to promote a single project or stop editing this page - if you continue to edit in such a disruptive manner the likely outcome will be a block. (Also, so you know, I am not an administrator - I am just someone who knows nothing about this suite of tools who is trying to cast a neutral eye over this entire situation). Localzuk^(talk) 10:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Localzuk, I think your comment is directed at the wrong person. Editor Thomas is the problem here. He can't leave our external link alone and has been deleting it over a 8 month period. Everytime I make an edit, Thomas or one of his group moderator buddies removes our link. (wiki bullies). They are a bitter bunch of ex-PanoTools members that need to grow up and move on. John Spikowski 16:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

No, my comment (at 10:34) was directed at you John. Wuz has stopped adding links that he is involved in (or so it seems) but you are once again causing trouble by removing a link because your site shouldn't be added by yourself. Stop thinking about 'out external link' and start thinking about 'Wikipedia'. Arguing over your own little sites does nothing to help this site and as such should be left at the door.-Localzuk^(talk) 17:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I never added a link to panotools.org, I just removed the word "original" from panotools.info or alternatively change the link to the original group. Both changes have been reverted. --Wuz 17:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

You need to read the history here before making such comments. I'm fine with the ALL panorama portals excluded from this page. Untill your action, the PanoToolsNG group dominated this pages with multiple links to their wiki, mailing list and group site. Anytime another groups link was added, it would be deleted by the PanoToolsNG management staff. All I'm asking for is equal treatment be shown here. John Spikowski 17:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I have been watching the history for quite some time and I believe I commented on this same issue a while back. My position is simple: any link is acceptable so long as it isn't added by someone with a conflict of interest and that it conforms to our external links policy. So any further argument over who did what is just churning up the same old complaints - it won't help anyone. The best thing to do here is simply work on the article in a neutral manner, avoid adding links to sites you are involved in and try and do so together. Wikipedia is a community and without civil and helpful discourse between editors with opposing views it will not be able to advance properly.-Localzuk^(talk) 17:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I have sent multiple e-mails to the PanoToolsNG staff trying to find common ground to move forward with both groups and they just ignore all communition efforts. Untill they realize that the PanoToolsNG group is not the only panorama resource on the web, this will continue to be a problem for everyone involved in the panorama community. John Spikowski 17:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but don't bring the Panotools community here - as I said, leave it at the door.-Localzuk^(talk) 17:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

As long as this page remains about Panorama Tools and not a advertizing page for the PanoToolsNG group I'm okay with how the page currently stands. If NG links start creeping back into the page, they will be deleted. John Spikowski 17:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

If you start deleting links to external sites due to your personal issues with them then that will be disruptive and I would be seeking a block against you for this behaviour. Just so you know. -Localzuk^(talk) 18:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

There are no personal issues involved here. It's about one group dominating a page with links that have no business being here. The rules apply to everyone and the NG group needs abide by them as well. John Spikowski 18:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

PanoToolsNG Wiki Removal Discussion

I see no reason to have the PanoToolsNG wiki as a resource on this page. There is only one page [2] on the PanoToolsNG wiki about the Panorama Tools software. The page is a shortened version of the current page here on Wikipedia. The PanoToolsNG wiki is dedicated to documenting Hugin, Google's Summer of Code project, forming a Verein corporation and defining group policy. The SourceForge home page link in the external links section refers to the PanoToolsNG wiki and mailing list. Adding the NG reference is duplication of information already available on the project home page.

This wiki is not about Panorama Tools and why the external link has been removed. If the NG group can show cause to reinstate the link, then we can move to arbitration with the Wikipeadia administrators to get it approved. John Spikowski 04:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, the site does have more than one page about the tools - as shown by the wikilinks on each tool's name. It also has pages on the terms used within the panorama tools niche which could be useful. However, as the sourceforge page links to it then there is no need for us to link directly to it. I will remove the link for now.

However, at the same time I will ask you, John, to stop focussing on links. Instead try focussing on how we can improve the article to a good article - as it stands it is quite a poor example of an article.-Localzuk^(talk) 10:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that you did in fact remove it, contrary to my advice on your conflict of interest. Why can you not just stop looking at links?-Localzuk^(talk) 10:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Localzuk, I don't see in the WP:EL policy where it states the reason you cite for removing the link, but please point me to it if this is wrong. If it's simply and opinion of yours that you feel it's unneeded, that's something else. It's also a bit confusing since you state that you find it could be helpful as well. Please don't take this criticism as an attack because it is not meant to me, but considering I seem to be somewhat more familiar to the subject of the article, I find it actually adds a lot of value to the article for many reasons. I'm going to revert your revert good faith revert for now considering this info and considering it's a link that has been with this article since it was created. Let's discuss. Thanks. Roguegeek (talk) 01:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

It comes down to what Wikipedia is and what Wikipedia is not. The site is not a link farm, and as the official sourceforge page has a link to the wiki, we do not need to link to it as well. It comes under 'any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article.' - it isn't a unique resource as the information is already available from the official link.-Localzuk^(talk) 09:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities

This would be a good place to explain the principles of panorama stitching and the different approaches to panorama viewers. Migration and helper utilities could also be reference. External links to the offerings would then be appropriate. I hope the Panorama Tools page will stay on track and this new page will cover the solutions that are not Panorama Tools based. John Spikowski 07:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

PTViewer

Is PTViewer not part of the Panorama Tools software set? Is Panorama Tools only the panorama creation part? I noticed that PTViewer wasn't in the list and I wondered if it was just missed or left out on purpose. John Spikowski 12:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Link

Rich: The PanoToolsNG wiki only has one page dedicated to Panorama Tools and it was used to build this page. The wiki and the mailing list are referred on the Panorama Tools SourceForge page and on the Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities page where relevant. This general purpose wiki reference is not appropriate for this page. John Spikowski 02:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Helmut & Panorama Tools

I noticed that Helmut doesn't have any references to Panorama Tools on his current website. PTViewer is the only remaining panorama related offering. Should an additional comment like "author's site - development discontinued" be added? Should it be assumed that Helmut transferred the project to the open source community and has no plans to revive his personal efforts. These are questions that should be asked at the Berkeley IVRPA meeting. John Spikowski 05:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Rich Wrote: "although I would like to see someone start a Dersch article"

That might be a tough job. He has never answered any of the e-mail I sent him. He has never posted to the PanoTools or PanoToolsNG list or contributed to the wiki. I'm pretty sure he hasn't made an appearance on the SourceForge project either. Why he disappeared and shutdown his list without notice is still a mystery to me. Maybe some of these questions will be answered at the IVRPA meeting in June. John Spikowski 07:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You know he answered to your "offers" several time, the last time on Apples QTVR List on Sun, 18 Mar 2007:

I did not give permission for framing or otherwise hijacking my website. The frames are now removed by a script (at least for visitors with Javascript enabled). [3].

Needless to say that you still hijack his site with http://www.panoramatools.com

--Wuz 12:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

(Incorrect Stmt 1.) He didn't reply to me. He sent a message saying that if you have JavaScript enabled you can 'pop' the site wrapper. (Incorrect Stmt 2.) I registered and pointed the www.panoramatools.info and www.panotools.net as a gift for his contributions. I never would of thought that he would have taken it as hijacking his site. I then offered to transfer the URL's to his name. (no response as usual) It's hard to know what to expect from Helmut. Please let me know when you getting tired of trashing everthing I do so I don't have to keep writing these obvious explanations to your personal attacks. John Spikowski 23:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

So why did you replied to Helmut if he didn't meant you? [4] --Wuz 23:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I replied to the Quicktime List (he doesn't reply to direct replies) and explained that the intent wasn't to hijack his site and I would disable the URL's per his request. If you feel the need to reopen this topic please do it on the QTVR list where it originated. John Spikowski 23:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

BTW: I don't own the www.panoramatools.com site. You will have to trash someone else on that one. What is your plans with the www.panoramatools.org site you registered? (your next group?) John Spikowski 23:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)