But moving the cites down from the lead was not disputed by the other interested editors. If you look, you'll see that there was quite a little battle trying to save the article from a deletionist who was not interested in finding sources himself. Consensus: the lead cleanup occurred in March 2010, and was not disputed by several highly interested editors. I didn't find any discussions by most other editors on lead citing? I will be restoring those cites soon, unless there is consensus with your argument with other editors and they disagree with my understanding.- Incident Flux 11:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC) Reply Controversy per se is only one trigger for discussion. As a test I'd suggest you remove cites from lead sections from the Wikipedia or iTunes articles and see how that goes. I'd say we can have additional cites in the history section, to keep the lead tidy. But if dates and names are mentioned there should be cites with them, specially if its the start of the article. There are many many good articles that have references in lead, I somewhat agree to adding too many redundant cites, however adding three distinct reliable sources adds value to any article. Lexein ( talk) 00:36, 21 March 2011 (UTC) Reply Firstly this is a non-controversial issue, and doesn't require discussion. Although it's true that in the extreme, there are no rules, I and apparently most other editors of this article agreed that this lead section looks better "clean." If an editor thinks the sources they found are better than those in the article, feel free to add them in the article, not the lead, and/or discuss them here. Per WP:LEADCITE, a long time ago, I moved citations (and their associated full text) out of the lead and down the article, and used the lead to merely summarize the article per MOS:LEAD. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance). This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Software Wikipedia:WikiProject Software Template:WikiProject Software software articles If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. Software : Computing B‑class Mid‑importance This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: For older candidates, please check the archive.Ĭurrent status: Former featured article candidate Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. The Winamp team said in March that Winamp 6 will be a "cross-platform app for Android, iOS, web, etc," and Winamp 5 for Windows (which has now received an update) is "not dead.Winamp is a former featured article candidate. Winamp might also add an online view for Bandcamp, Spotify, Lyrics, and other online services.Ĭontinued development on the classic version of Winamp is happening alongside the company's other music-related ambitions, which involves an updated cross-platform version, a 'Winamp Foundation' that funds musicians, and NFT sales. Support for more media codecs are planned, including Opus, OGV/OGM, H.265, VP9, and other formats. Now that Winamp has a more modern codebase and many bug fixes, the team plans to continue working on more features. Related: What Is HEVC H.265 Video, and Why Is It So Important for 4K Movies? The rest of the changes are bug fixes or rewritten code - Winamp's development team said the most significant change was "migrating the entire project from VS2008 to VS2019 and getting it all to build successfully." The media player still looks and works the same as before, but now officially supports Windows 11, media using the VP8 codec, and HTTPS media streams. The stable version of Winamp 5.9 is now available to download for Windows PCs, following a beta release earlier this year.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |