Talk:TeXstudio

Ad items, vague items and duplicates

I recently did some (in my opinion) cleanup of the article. Example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=612752484&oldid=612751494 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=612752484&oldid=612751494

My edits were undone however:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=613981957&oldid=613981863 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=613996236&oldid=613981957

This user was also the original "author" of these edits. They seem to be copied from the official site.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=605776761&oldid=602795480 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=605858962&oldid=605856822 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=605841097&oldid=605828259

I've once again deleted that info as no reason was specified for undoing my commits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=616768803&oldid=616768782 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TeXstudio&diff=616768919&oldid=616768803

78.69.195.195 (talk) 10:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You two should find a workable middle way here: Many infos Carlitos9305 added are totally notable and I'd like to have them in the article. Overall his improvements so far definitely deserve credit.
What should be worked on is the presentation of the info. Generally lists and tables should be avoided were possible. Therefore I have two ideas how to improve the article while keeping most of the info intact:

The list of features should be cut down to the important features of TeXstudio which differentiate it from other TeX editing software. Common features do not need to be listed (as everybody can read on them on the official homepage), the special features need some explanation in continuous text though (otherwise a reader can not profit from this information which makes it worthless for him in effect).
The current section on "Release history" has to be split: The parts being simple release notifications ("The new release TeXstudio 2.3 is available." etc.) can be left out. Wikipedia is not the place for a tabular release history, at most we should put a link to the release history on the homepage and maybe quickly describe the most important milestones in continuous text. The parts being "historical facts" (most of the bolded ones like "TexMakerX is now called TeXstudio.") should go into the "History" section, again written down as continuous text.

I hope this works for both of you!

@IP: It would be a nice idea if you'd have improve the article instead of simply deleting stuff you didn't like. Normally this results in much higher productivity and a lot less frustration on both sides. --Patrick87 (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick87 (talk) 78.69.195.195

Patrick 87, you're absolutely right I think it's great your idea, when you have time to come up out the most important features of the software and will detail a bit, the table you're right and if it was a mistake of doing so, then I will create a story of texstudio is important.

I must also place images with features that make it unique to texstudio, do not you think.

And with much respect I think it is very disrespectful @ IP erasing the work I have done and unsubstantiated only limited to clear, I think it's great constructive criticism from patric87 but not how IP ase.

thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlitos9305 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dede ada pesan masuk dari wa anda

dede ada pes 114.5.249.5 (talk) 09:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]