PureBasic Forums - English

I thought Wikipedia is a project by and for the community. It's just stupid when one high-ranking person (?) can decide about deletions and everything. Some month ago I read an article about leaving Wikipedia contributors because those high-rankers know it better anyway...

I just added the following to the Wikipedia debate about its deletion. I think it'd be hard for them to argue with their own rules and standards!

I see from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... (software) that software is notable if it meets ONE of the specified criteria from a four-point list. PureBasic meets criteria #3: The software is the subject of multiple printed third party manuals, instruction books, or reliable reviews[1], written by independent authors and published by independent publishers. We have established this with the cites I and others have posted. Further, I see from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... _Beer_test that it states: This page in a nutshell: If nobody has published a "99 Bottles of Beer" program for a specific programming language, it probably isn't notable. and also The 99 Bottles of Beer test can be used to show the lack of notability of a programming language. We can establish that PureBasic therefore IS considered notable due to inclusion here: http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/langu ... c-568.html Ergo, PureBasic IS notable, based on the criteria set by Wikipedia's own standards! I rest my case. Thank you. I vote KEEP.

We won! The debate to delete the article has been withdrawn. RadioFan still maintains that there's not enough reliability for the cites, though. Sheesh, what a load of bollocks this all was. More discussion can be had here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:PureBasic

c4s wrote:It's just stupid when one high-ranking person (?) can decide about deletions and everything.

I find RadioFan's behavior to be nothing more than a massive ego and power-trip! I thought deletions could only occur after discussion? Is there somewhere on Wikipedia that we can report his behavior?

The Book "Programming 2D scrolling games" is sold by Idigicon: http://www.idigicon.com/

Another Wiki: http://gpwiki.org/index.php/PUREBASIC

PureBasic is very prominent on the Rosetta Code Wiki: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category:PureBasic

Independent Reference to the book: http://gpwiki.org/index.php/Programming ... ling_games


External References:

http://bluez.home.xs4all.nl/purebasic/index.htm#top
PureBasic Survival Guide

http://www.reelmedia.org/cgi-bin/PurePr ... ser=&pass=
Pauls' Pure Project Online Reference Guide and User Libraries

http://www.progui.co.uk/index.html
Graphical User Interface Library

http://www.jhc-software.de/jens_haipete ... #PrtLib440
Jens Pure Basic User Libraries

http://www.horstmuc.de/pb.htm
Horst Schaeffer's Software Pages

http://www.purearea.net/
Pure Basic Libraries, Code Snippets, Tips and Tools

http://gnozal.ucoz.com/
Gnozal's Purebasic place

http://www.purebasicpower.de/?PureBasic
PureBasic Libraries

The book doesn't show up with a search at Idigicon's site. Also, RadioFan won't accept any Wiki links as valid cites. He wants real websites that have nothing to do with PureBasic as cites. I just realised PureVisionXP's website would qualify, so I'll link it.

It does not show up because their search facility is not very good

Is there a link there for the book that you know of, then?

I've added of lot of references, please correct if there's errors, and add yours!

Can someone add the references that I have posted here? If I try to edit the External Refs on the Wiki, the editor does not show the list that needs to be added to..........

Idigicon unfortunately do not have their books featured on their website.

IdeasVacuum wrote:Can someone add the references that I have posted here? If I try to edit the External Refs on the Wiki, the editor does not show the list that needs to be added to..........

Idigicon unfortunately do not have their books featured on their website.

You don't have to edit the external refs, they're created automatically. Just add in the text <ref name="my ref">[http://mylink.com link text], longest description</ref>

When I use that syntax, the result on the page is [1]

I give up!

Yeah, you have a [1], and the reference is added at the bottom of the page, in the references section, as it is in any encyclopedia