Difference between revisions of "BetaWiki:Community portal"

From BetaWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Cleanup the old naming scheme)
m (Support)
(46 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
 
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
<table style="width: 100%; margin: 2px">
+
{{fmbox|type=system|image=none|text=<center>
<tr>
+
<span style="font-size: 150%;">Welcome to BetaWiki community portal!</span>
<td style="border: 1px solid lightgray; background-color: #F8F8F8; padding: 5px; ">
 
<!-- Welcome header -->
 
{| style="width: 100%;"
 
|style="font-size: 150%;"|<center>Welcome to BetaWiki community portal!</center>
 
|-
 
|<center>This is where we discuss the operations of BetaWiki. Please help us to set down policies and guidelines, improve articles and more. </center>
 
|-
 
|<center>To add discussion, please add a new heading under this line.</center>
 
|}
 
</td>
 
</tr>
 
</table>
 
<div style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20pt 20pt;">__TOC__</div>
 
  
==Test==
+
This is where we discuss the operations of BetaWiki. Please help us to set down policies and guidelines, improve articles and more.
Test community portal... [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 09:58, 10 May 2015 (BST)
 
  
==Regarding the spammer==
+
If you want to request a specific administration action to be done, please use the [[BetaWiki:administrators' noticeboard|administrators' noticeboard]] instead.
AlphaBeta, The IP that has attacked a few users about here should be blocked. The IP's attack behaviour was unacceptable. I know you say it's not spamming. But it's personal attack, which some may consider worse than spamming. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 10:26, 12 May 2015 (BST)
 
  
==Main Page==
+
To add discussion, please add a new heading under this line.
I have restored some of the elements of the Main Page, such as the News section. VIPs are now again able to edit the Main Page, but please restrict that to editing the News section. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 13:19, 30 May 2015 (BST)
+
</center>
 +
}}
 +
{{archives}}
 +
{{TOC|clear=left|limit=2}}
 +
== Cleanup the old naming scheme ==
  
==Windows 10 Update Builds==
+
If anyone has a script or bot that can help with changing old naming schemes like "Windows:7" to "Windows 7" and "Windows:NT4.0:1500" to "Windows NT 4.0 build 1500", that would be appreciated. It's everywhere in Windows Vista and later articles and cleaning it up isn't an easy task. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 22:39, 3 September 2018 (BST)
Should we add all update builds to the Windows 10 page as soon as it RTMs or should we keep it in the current state, perhaps with BLItems instead of ESD filenames? --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 13:19, 30 May 2015 (BST)
+
:Likewise, if anyone has a bot or script to replace the "bios" to "compiled" in for infoboxes alongside correcting the date, it would be well great if that can be used. Like I said though, it is expected to set the bios dates back by 1, not just replace all references of "bios" to "compiled". [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 15:28, 15 January 2019 (GMT)
:Keep it in current state. Otherwise, Windows 10 main page will be cluttery. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 08:36, 3 June 2015 (BST)
+
::Just finished cleaning up the old naming system for all Windows builds in one of the most cumbersome ways possible, since [[:wikipedia:Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser|AutoWikiBrowser]] refused to log me in here. The only pages in use with the old naming space now are [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds]] and its subpages - [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:9xxx]], [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:100xx]] and [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:10xxx]]. --[[User:Cvolton|Cvolton]] ([[User talk:Cvolton|talk]]) 21:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 +
:::Thanks for cleaning that up. Now all I have to do is to choose how we name the update build pages. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 23:36, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  
==Yet another question==
+
== I know I'm bringing this up again but... ==
Should we name pages like [[Windows:Explorer]], [[Windows:DCE]] according the Guidelines and leave the current state or apply the Guidelines naming system to builds only and rename these pages to Windows Explorer, Desktop Composition Engine and so on? --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 18:44, 2 June 2015 (BST)
 
  
I think we shall apply the Guidelines naming sistem to builds only, because names like [[Windows:DCE]] can be quite confusing, since "Windows DCE" never existed.--[[Special:Contributions/46.102.69.61|46.102.69.61]] 19:24, 2 June 2015 (BST) (ovctvct)
+
Hahaha. http://osesbeta.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Raffine2014/Leaving_Operating_System_Beta,_etc._Wiki --[[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 13:39, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 +
:I have a good feeling it was fake though. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 13:45, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 +
::That was in 2017. [[User:LarryTN7722|LarryTN7722]] ([[User talk:LarryTN7722|talk]]) 13:52, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 +
:::Oh lol, guess he's stupid enough to "block" himself. Who's gonna miss his ripoff wiki anyway? -[[User:ATeamInc|ATeamInc]] ([[User talk:ATeamInc|talk]]) 14:55, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
  
==Improvement==
+
== Oh, look at this ==
I am going to improve the articles on BetaWiki. People, it is ''not'' good that some of our pages are merely a few words. They should have more information, so I will add more. We have some very good articles (such as Windows 1 DR5 and Windows 8.1 Preview) but some are underdeveloped. So I will enhance them with content, images, etc. Thanks for your attention. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 10:48, 5 July 2015 (BST)
 
:I have to move several pages because of people not following the guidelines. It says that we are not BA, don't include the timestamp in the article name. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 11:37, 2 August 2015 (BST)
 
:I want to improve the articles about Windows 8 builds. I would like to start with build 7850; does anyone have an ISO in their collection they could provide a link to (on MEGA, preferably, it's more secure)? [[User:Callum90ish|Callum90ish]] ([[User talk:Callum90ish|talk]]) 19:58, 15 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::There's something wrong with your signature Callum. Also, I don't have an ISO, but try ftp://oscollect.old-dos.ru. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 09:15, 15 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::Unfortunately, there is nothing there on Windows 8. It's going to be difficult fixing up the wiki, when half the builds are only available in Fort Knox (BA FTP). [[User:Callum90ish|Callum90ish]] ([[User talk:Callum90ish|talk]]) 20:37, 15th August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::Hey, I can help you with several builds. However, I can't provide any builds due to my (lack of) upload speeds. --[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 10:50, 15 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::What builds can you help me write better articles for? I've got Windows 7 Beta & Pre-beta build 6801, Windows 8 DP and a wide range of Vista builds. Do you have some other builds you can provide information and screenshots for? [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] (User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 11:14, 16 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::::I did screenshots of build 5048, you can see them on the build's page. I also have some screenshots of: Windows 98, NT 4, Windows 10 Technical Preview. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 00:32, 16 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::What 98 builds do you have screenshots of? Might as well start from the earlier builds, since that's what people look at (in my experience, usually either because I told them too, or because they're more interesting). [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 11:50, 16 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::::::Hey, I have the following 9x builds, and I can sort them by the difficulty in installing them in VMware or Virtualbox: Easy: 431, 445, 450, 456, 468, 474, 490, 501, all of the leaked 950-r? builds, 1094, 2106-2222A, 2332-2470, 2481-2535. Difficult: 58s-73g, 189-405 (except 346), all leaked 11xx builds, 1411, 1434, 1593, 1619, 1650-1900 (English builds only). Painful: 81-122, 1511, 1518, 1525, 1559. I don't have access to my main right now (and it's going to undergo an upgrade soon, anyway) but I'll try to start on more of these articles ASAP. I already did 1 or 2 of the more boring builds, like 445, as they may literally only have a couple of changes noticeable to normal people.--[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 03:38, 16 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::::Okay, then. If you work on those 9x builds, I'll start work on NT5/6/10 builds. I have quite a few of them.  The problem will be getting hold of builds in order to gather information and screenshots. Curse Steve Sinofsky and his obsession with plugging every last leak!!! [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 15:53, 16 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::::::::[takes jacket off :P] I'll do Windows XP screenshots, earlier ones are a little intimidating at this point but I'll figure it out. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:46, 16 August 2015 (BST)
 
::::::::::: I might start with Windows 7. If anybody wants to help me, download links for ISO's (excl. 6801/7000), screenshots and information are all welcome. [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 18:05, 16 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::: Does anyone know a good website for Windows 7 builds? [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 10:19, 17 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::: Sadly none exists afaik. BA is the only one who provides ISO's of 7 betas. Olddos.ru only gives a 6780 ISO, plus that ISO is broken(throws error during setup). Would you like a 6936 ISO? But I can only upload it to my google drive. Note: To install 6936 in workstation,select windows 7 x64 as guest, select LSI Logic adapter ONLY, other adapters causes setup to freeze. And download this to enable the superbar and other locked stuff: http://static.squarespace.com/static/514e2905e4b023ca28fd2047/514e2ad8e4b0d528d07c0c96/514e2ae0e4b0d528d07c13b4/1323212437000/BlueBadge_rev3_x64.zip?format=original Wil provid ISO ASAP.--[[Special:Contributions/85.122.4.49|85.122.4.49]] 06:16, 17 August 2015 (BST) (ovctvct)
 
::::::::::::: OK. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:52, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
::::::::::::: Great. If you have any other NT6.x builds, I'd appreciate it if you could upload them. Finding leaked builds, especially in the 6.1-6.3 range, is tricky, and I'm pretty sure we can all agree that torrent sites stink for older leaks, because hardly any of those older builds have any seeders. This is a BIG job. [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 18:01, 17 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::::: Currently I'm using VBox, which makes any pre-2296 Whistler builds hang at setup :'{ [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 07:07, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::::::::: How about I do those ones? [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 18:50, 17 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::::::::::: Here's that 6936 ISO : https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2CQR48oiPa5eUU1aTgzZ01RZ0U/view?usp=sharing Please tell here when you finished download as it must be removed or some [censored] will DMCA me. --[[Special:Contributions/94.176.152.6|94.176.152.6]] 11:55, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::::::::: Finished now [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) 17:09, 18 August 2015 (NZD)
 
:::::::::::::: OK, link is now down. --[[Special:Contributions/94.176.159.71|94.176.159.71]] 16:37, 18 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::::::::: @callum90ish - No offence, but it seems that you didn't contribute to the 6936 article yet, even though I given you the ISO. Also, you said you have 6801&7000 ISOs, but you didn't even touch the respective pages....Hope you aren't just asking for the ISO's just to play with them and nothing else, if so I will never upload such ISOs again. --[[Special:Contributions/94.176.152.83|94.176.152.83]] 16:54, 19 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::::::::::I'm not. It simply takes a while to find good information and collate it. Plus, to find interesting differences in a build, a certain amount of "playing with it" is necessary. - [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) - 08:02, 20 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::::::Plus, I've had issues getting 6936 to install. Keeps stalling at "Setup is starting services...". I've started improving the existing article, but can't do much more until I get the build installed. It's been taking up a fair bit of my time trying to get it running, plus I'm really busy at the moment with work. There's not enough time in the day. [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) - 09:47, 20 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::::: Read what I wrote above. Use '''LSI Logic adapter ONLY''', NOT LSI Logic SAS. That way it must work, at least it did for me. Use Windows 7 x64  as guest OS setting. Also, what VMware version do you use? I use 7.1.4 and it works if I select that adapter when making the VM. So, delete the VM and select LSI logic when creating the new one.--[[Special:Contributions/85.122.7.11|85.122.7.11]] 10:24, 20 August 2015 (BST)
 
::::::::::::::: Thanks octvt. I've fleshed out the article a bit. Do you have any other 7/8 era ISO's? Builds for those versions are pretty hard to come by. - [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) - 13:09, 2nd September 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::::::::::::: ATM I don't have any other build, but I can download one just in case. --[[Special:Contributions/85.122.6.120|85.122.6.120]] 07:04, 2 September 2015 (BST) (ovctvct)
 
:::::::::::::::: Thanks, that would be great. ATM I've only got 7850 from the NT6.2 era, plus the CP... - [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]]  ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) - 19:31, 2 September 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::::::: Would you like 7989? (In case you wonder, I am currenly using an ipv4 to ipv6 tunnel, explaining my IP) --[[Special:Contributions/2001:470:6E:794:0:0:0:2|2001:470:6E:794:0:0:0:2]] 18:39, 3 September 2015 (BST)
 
::::::::::::::::: 7989 would be fantastic. That's one of the builds I've wanted to get my mitts on for a LONG time! - [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:callum90ish|talk]]) - 07:17, 3rd September 2015 (NZDT)
 
:::::::::::::::::: Sorry for bloating the page, but three new Windows 8 builds (7973.fbl_core1, 7973.fbl_core2 and 8056.fbl_grfx) have leaked at OSBetaarchive recently. You might want to to check them out as they'e freely available. --[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 16:37, 20 September 2015 (BST)
 
::::::::::::::::::: Yeah, I saw that. I'm waiting till I head off to school, because they've got fibre, versus cruddy ADSL2+ here at home. [[User:Callum90ish|Callum90ish]] ([[User talk:Callum90ish|talk]]) 21:02, 20 September 2015 (BST)
 
  
==Improvement II==
+
https://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page I'm just gonna leave this here, lol. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 11:53, 2 December 2018 (GMT)
Because it was becoming painful to post from there, I'll make this one. Also Callum you can do anything pre-2296 thanks for your help. I'm actually installing them right now, so yes. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 08:03, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
: Okay, then. Downloading 2250 at the moment. Do you know anyone who might have some Windows 7/8 ISO's? I don't have many of those, thanks to S. Sinofsky and his obsession with plugging leaks. Thank heavens they fired him! [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:Callum90ish|talk]]) 19:40, 17 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
:: Ha. I don't know, but I'll upload the images tomorrow. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 09:56, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::Here's a good collection of NT 6.0 builds for you to start with: [https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-longhorn-vis] --[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 11:46, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
::::I am currently improving some NT builds, and one build (5.0.1965) includes an NFO. How do I format and add it properly (like the one in the Windows 8 Build 8888 article)?--[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 13:14, 17 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::I don't know. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:55, 18 August 2015 (BST)
 
::::::I will be updating less frequently in the coming days. I have to clear out my downloads queue and upgrade to 10514 on my main. I also want to upgrade to 10525 on my secondary.--[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 11:56, 19 August 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::Good on you. Everybody needs a break sometimes. [[User:callum90ish|callum90ish]] ([[User talk:Callum90ish|talk]]) - 08:37, 20 August 2015 (NZDT)
 
::::::::I'm going to upgrade to 10514 very soon (think 20-30 minutes or so). I will be a bit more active after a few hours. --[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 14:10, 3 September 2015 (BST)
 
:::::::::Things are done here, but I'll need some time to install my apps/drivers. --Recycle.bin --[[Special:Contributions/182.74.246.202|182.74.246.202]] 16:26, 3 September 2015 (BST)
 
  
==The images==
+
== Merge Longhorn and Vista ==
I must say, we are getting to reasonable levels of activity here. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 07:23, 21 August 2015 (BST)
 
  
==Featured article==
+
There has been a debate on the Discord regarding this. IMHO we should merge [[Windows Longhorn]] into [[Windows Vista]], since even though many ideas such as WinFS that were planned for Longhorn didn't make it to Vista, a lot of them did. This is even noticeable in the terminology used to refer to the development phases: "development reset" implies that the project has been ''restarted'', not ''scrapped''. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 17:11, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
I was thinking of an idea to BetaWiki that I've seen at other wikis. The idea is that one of our best article, gets displayed on the main page. It could be an initiative for users to improve articles to FA status. there should be an 'Article of the month', that is well-written and provides a large amount of information. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 00:48, 8 September 2015 (BST)
 
:I doubt it will work anyways, considering how "much" people care about some(actually most) articles. If you post a specific article on the main page that's too neglected it will do nothing but waste time. No chance, people seem to lose interest in betas nowadays. No matter what you do, they don't get interested anyway. So it's pretty much hopeless.--[[Special:Contributions/2001:470:1F1A:292:0:0:0:2|2001:470:1F1A:292:0:0:0:2]] 08:44, 8 September 2015 (BST)
 
::That's like saying this wiki is pointless because the beta community in Sept. 2015, is near to nonexistent. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:58, 10 September 2015 (BST)
 
:::'''In progress''' [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 09:25, 5 March 2017 (GMT)
 
  
== Votes for deletion ==
+
=== Support ===
 +
# [[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 17:11, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
 +
# [[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]]) 17:21, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
 +
# [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 17:34, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
 +
# TCB also does this too, so we might as well have it like that. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 19:01, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
  
I'm proposing an idea for BetaWiki: Add a 'votes for deletion' (VfD) process which discusses whether or not a page should be deleted based on community consensus, but not for pages which should be quickly deleted (such as spam/promotion, vandalism, etc.) VfD nominations may be placed in the [[BetaWiki:Delete requests]] page, and tagged with this template: [[User:InfinityPlus1/VfD]]. --[[User:InfinityPlus1|InfinityPlus1]] ([[User talk:InfinityPlus1|talk]]) 05:20, 8 September 2015 (BST)
+
=== Oppose ===
:Good idea. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:57, 10 September 2015 (BST)
+
# [[User:LarryTN7722|LarryTN7722]] ([[User talk:LarryTN7722|talk]]) 03:04, 23 December 2018 (GMT)
  
== Protection policy (and other protection-related proposals) ==
+
== Itanium and DEC Alpha users wanted ==
  
Here is my proposed protection policy:<br/>
+
Since some builds such as [[Windows 2000 build 1855.1]] and the Windows XP 64-Bit builds needs special architectures that can only be done on real hardware. If anyone has necessary hardware to run these builds, that would be appreciated to get them installed and provide images of the build. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 20:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
[[User:InfinityPlus1/Protection_policy]]<br/>
 
I am proposing the following along with the policy here:
 
* Admin only protection should be called "full protection".
 
* Edit-trust only protection should be called "quasi-protection".
 
* Registered user only protection should be called "semi-protection".
 
* Differently colored lock icons for each protection type:
 
<gallery>
 
File:Protected_full.png|Full protection
 
File:Protected_quasi.png|Quasi-protection
 
File:Protected_semi.png|Semi-protection
 
File:Protected_move.png|Move protection
 
File:Protected_upload.png|Upload protection
 
File:Protected_create.png|Create protection
 
</gallery>
 
* The notice that appears when editing/moving a quasi-protected page should be changed to the following:
 
'''Note:''' This page has been protected so that only trusted users can edit it. The latest log entry is provided below for reference:<br/>
 
<small>Note: Add support votes under "<nowiki>===Support===</nowiki>" but above "<nowiki>===Oppose===</nowiki>". Add oppose votes under "<nowiki>===Oppose===</nowiki>" but above "<nowiki>===Discussion===</nowiki>". Add general discussion/comments under "<nowiki>===Discussion===</nowiki>".</small>
 
--[[User:InfinityPlus1|InfinityPlus1]] ([[User talk:InfinityPlus1|talk]]) 06:01, 15 September 2015 (BST)
 
===Support===
 
#I'm pro. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:01, 18 September 2015 (BST)
 
  
===Oppose===
+
== Android and other misc operating systems need Infoboxes. ==
#I'm con. [[User:User99672|User99672]] ([[User talk:User99672|talk]]) 00:55, 16 October 2015 (BST)
 
#I'm con too. We're not Wikipedia, we don't need those.--[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]]) 07:08, 17 October 2015 (BST)
 
#Con aswell. [[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 22:27, 22 October 2015 (BST)
 
#Frankly, I think that this system is unnecessary, and so I'm voting for 'con'. --[[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 19:45, 24 October 2015 (BST)
 
  
===Discussion===
+
They don't have any. Also, the Mac ones need updating. --[[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 03:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
I thought there was an issue for a while, in that this wiki concentrates, let's just say 10% on the management of the wiki and 90% on the information contained within. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 06:02, 18 September 2015 (BST)
+
:ToMi and I made infoboxes for NeXTSTEP, Android, and MS-DOS.--<code>[[User:MCpillager|MCpillager]] ([[User talk:MCpillager|talk]]) ([[User:MCpillager/Sandbox|Sandbox]]) <span style="color:darkred;">1004065811 bytes of data </span></code> 14:19, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
:User99672, what's the issue? You might want to explain why you're contra. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 05:46, 16 October 2015 (BST)
 
::I would've responded to this earlier had there been some form of notification system. Oh well, my apologies. I find it blatantly un-necessary. The amount of traffic and frequency of spammings here just doesn't *warrant* it. [[User:User99672|User99672]] ([[User talk:User99672|talk]]) 18:23, 25 November 2015 (GMT)
 
  
== Management and voting templates ==
+
== Suggestion for the Longhorn/Vista build pages ==
  
At the moment I'm working on a series of templates to use in various community discussions, for instance to vote on important matters, or for admin use. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 23:16, 9 October 2015 (BST)
+
Because Windows Vista was codenamed Longhorn and both pages have been merged, we should replace all references in all pre-reset pages from Longhorn to Vista.
 +
Do you think we should do it? [[Special:Contributions/2.30.192.61|2.30.192.61]] 19:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
  
== Database error? ==
+
===Support===
 +
===Oppose===
 +
# [[User:LarryTN7722|LarryTN7722]] ([[User talk:LarryTN7722|talk]]) 05:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 +
# [[User:Caveria|Caveria]] ([[User talk:Caveria|talk]]) 12:31, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
  
Yesterday I tried to access the site, but there was an issue with the database. Now it is fixed, of course. I wonder if it was actually a client-side issue, because it appears (RecentChanges) other users were correctly able to edit. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 05:46, 16 October 2015 (BST)
+
===Discussions===
:I got that too, it could be because the mediawiki is quite outdated(1.23.0),latest is 1.25.--[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]]) 07:08, 17 October 2015 (BST)
+
===Questions===
::Perhaps that's the case. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 22:59, 17 October 2015 (BST)
 
:It's not really outdated. If you bothered to check, you'd find that 1.23.0 is a LTS release. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 01:03, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
 
 
== Protection ==
 
 
 
It used to come across to me that this wiki is rather censorship-happy due to protecting pages all over the place. Why don't we have some sort of template which says, 'This page is protected'? Also, for one-off vandalism, ''temporary'' protection is better. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 01:21, 8 November 2015 (GMT)
 
 
 
== Civil ==
 
 
 
Is this a rule yet? ''Be civil to other users, and don't make directly criticising edits. Also don't back-seat sysop.'' [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 09:05, 25 November 2015 (GMT)
 
 
 
== Boxes! ==
 
I have put some effort and made Wikipedia-alike administration info "boxes". You can check out them [[BetaWiki:Sandbox|there]]. If there are no objections, I will replace the actual templates with ones using the new [[:Template:Box]]. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 01:03, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
::This is nice. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 01:24, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
 
 
== Flow ==
 
 
 
Just will leave the following link here and let me know what do you think of it and whether should I get it running on BetaWiki... https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 01:17, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
:I {{Oppose}} this. I've used Flow on another wiki and it's glitchy and just makes it confusing to navigate. We should however implement DPLforum. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 01:23, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
::I briefly checked DPLforum, and I've got to object. This is a wiki and not a forum board. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 01:29, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
 
 
== -Info templates ==
 
 
 
I am renaming -Info templates (BuildInfo, StorePackageInfo, VersionInfo, etc.) to InfoBox Something to conform with the wiki standards (VersionInfo will get an infobox soon). Redirects are going to stay as long as there are still articles referring to the old names. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 02:28, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
::This is indeed a good system. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 02:59, 29 November 2015 (GMT)
 
 
 
== On Windows CE ==
 
 
 
We don't have any CE-related articles yet, but when we do, is Windows Mobile to be given a separate page? I personally say no. However, Windows Phone should have its own page as it's an altogether-different platform, whereas Windows Mobile is based on CE. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 03:46, 11 December 2015 (GMT)
 
:What about Windows 10 Mobile, considering the new OneCore strategy? --[[Special:Contributions/89.29.80.194|89.29.80.194]] 13:57, 23 December 2015 (GMT)
 
::Is that really a separate OS base? [[Special:Contributions/120.144.40.84|120.144.40.84]] 22:25, 30 December 2015 (GMT)
 
:::That's the point... --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 18:43, 2 April 2016 (BST)
 
::::Windows 10 Mobile should still be on the Windows Phone page, at least until further information. [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 05:33, 3 April 2016 (BST)
 
 
 
== A link ==
 
 
 
[http://t4cfantasy.com/WOS/WOS-C%20v8.6.2%20Beta%203a.txt Is this useful???] [[User:Tau Ceti|Tau Ceti]] ([[User talk:Tau Ceti|talk]]) 22:16, 11 January 2016 (GMT)
 
 
 
== How do we list periodical releases? ==
 
 
 
Because, as we know, Microsoft will now release Windows versions in a gradual system, but now the Threshold Wave 2 and Redstone builds are listed on the Windows 10 page. Should we do like BA and make separate pages for [[Windows:10:TH2]] and [[Windows:10:RS1]]? [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 01:05, 13 June 2016 (BST)
 
  
== A poll for the above ==
+
== Suggestions for infoboxes on build pages. ==
  
 +
On infoboxes on build pages (for every operating system) we should add which build came before it and what came after it.
 +
I will leave a poll below so people can decide whether it is any good. [[Special:Contributions/2.28.175.216|2.28.175.216]] 17:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 
===Support===
 
===Support===
#{{Support}} [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 04:15, 7 August 2016 (BST)
 
 
 
===Oppose===
 
===Oppose===
 +
# We already have done this in the past and it was hard to maintain it. The next/previous settings had to be removed for a good reason. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 17:24, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 +
# Actually, I {{Oppose}} it too. If you keep adding builds to pages (like with the Windows 10 pages) you would have to find the build before it (with an article) and edit the next/previous setting. This would be inaccurate for builds in between without articles. --[[Special:Contributions/2.28.175.216|2.28.175.216]] 14:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  
 
===Discussion===
 
===Discussion===
 +
'''CLOSED'''
  
'''PASSED'''
+
== Cancelled versions of Windows ==
 
 
== Fork ==
 
 
 
It appears there is a [http://osesbeta.wikia.com fork of BetaWiki] made at Wikia, because here there are apparently 'too many spammers'. Essentially, all the pages are copied from BetaWiki. I don't like this idea, as it just spreads everyone out and leads to less activity here. [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 09:27, 5 March 2017 (GMT)
 
::UPDATE: Also, BillyHatcher2012 is the head admin. (Tau Ceti)
 
Yeah, but don't bother with it, keep editing here instead. There are many pages missing on that "fork" also. Also, I don't think staff members here would agree with it(don't ask, but hounsell promoted me to an admin again), nor do I. --[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]]) 12:03, 5 March 2017 (GMT)
 
:::I'm not surprised if this is Billy's work. He's probably going to use it for all the fake builds he made. [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 09:45, 6 March 2017 (GMT)
 
:Idle hands are the devil's playgrou­nd. Just let them operate their cheap wiki. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 00:00, 24 March 2017 (GMT)
 
 
 
== "BetaWiki hub" ==
 
 
 
We should probably make a new main page that would link people to the various topics covered on BetaWiki.
 
 
 
My initial concept is the following:
 
 
 
[[Image:Mainpage-con1.png|120px]]
 
 
 
I am putting this concept there so we can discuss making BetaWiki great <s>again</s>. Would love to hear your opinion and suggestions.
 
--[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 18:04, 24 March 2017 (GMT)
 
 
 
:Excellent. First featured article: [[Windows:1:DR5]]. [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 23:25, 24 March 2017 (GMT)
 
:: I plan to start with featuring a beta for a month, as the wiki doesn't really have a lot of articles that we could show off. When that improves, I have no problem with weekly featured betas. --[[Special:Contributions/89.29.80.194|89.29.80.194]] 08:55, 25 March 2017 (GMT)
 
 
 
== Revamping the article naming system ==
 
 
 
In the last weeks I've been thinking a lot about radically revamping the article naming guidelines, which currently use semicolons to delimitate the operating system name, its version and the build. This system worked great for Windows when there was a major release every 2 years, i.e.: <code>[[Windows:8.1:9431:winmain bluemp]]</code>.
 
 
 
This system [[Windows:10-TH2|does]] [[Windows:10-RS1|not]] [[Windows:10-RS2|adapt]] [[Windows:10-RS3|well]] to the constant updates to Windows 10 flowing from Microsoft in the last two years. Do we consider each update as a separate OS version? Or do we treat them as Service Packs? What about these special server releases that have an NT buildtag as well as a build number of their own? Which one do we use?
 
 
 
The current Infoboxes partially depend on the current naming system. Meanwhile it is nice to have an automatic system, it doesn't save the editor an enormous amount of time as compared to filling the basic information to the template manually, not mentioning the fact the system always struggled with strange names like <code>[[Windows:HomeServer]]</code>.
 
 
 
What replacement do I propose? I propose getting rid of the semicolons and relax the naming guidelines a little bit, but still keep a system. Let me first present my suggestion of how would my new system work with the 9431 I mentioned above:
 
{{Code|
 
1. Windows 8.1 build 9431<br>
 
2. Windows 8.1 build 9431 (winmain_bluemp)<br>
 
----
 
''Windows 8.1 Preview''<br>
 
''6.3.9431.0.winmain_bluemp.130615-1214''<br>
 
''9431.0.winmain_bluemp.130615-1214''<br>
 
''Windows:8.1:9431:winmain_bluemp''
 
}}
 
 
 
Let's take a look at the first two lines and ignore the rest for now. The basic idea is that the final name that's displayed within the OS gets combined with the magic word "build" and the build number + the revision number if it's not equal to 0 (#1). Obviously that would work as long as there aren't several known builds sharing [[Windows:Longhorn:4015:main|the]] [[Windows:Longhorn:4015:Lab06_n|same]] build number. This is where we need to specify the build lab and the suggested way is to mention it in a bracket (#2). Of course, there can even become a situation when we cover two builds with the same number, from the same lab, but with [[Windows:8.1:9600.16384:winblue rtm|a]] [[Windows:8.1:9600.16384:winblue_rtm:130822|different]] build time, which we should solve on an individual basis. I think can count such cases using the fingers of my hand.
 
 
 
Well and how does that fix the Windows 10 problem? We would call them all Windows 10. After all, they're not really different from the original July 2015 RTW. The build article would mention the update it belongs to. By removing the semicolon system it won't look so much out of order. Another issue that this new system would fix is early OS/2, which has different Microsoft and IBM editions. Currently the vendor is mentioned in the middle of a build article name, I believe it should get the prominent place in the front of the article name. We are going to solve that later.
 
 
 
=== The Proposal ===
 
# As long as BetaWiki knows about just one build with a said build number + revision, the article would receive a name according to example #1 above. To maintain some degree of consistency, example #2 should redirect to example #1.
 
# If BetaWiki knows about two builds with a said build number but from differing labs, the individual build articles would receive their names in accordance with example #2. A disambiguation will reside on a name formed according to example #1.
 
# If the build has got an official name, we should redirect it to the main article. Windows 10 Insider Preview redirects to main Windows 10 article.
 
# The full buildtag, both including and not including the major and minor version must redirect to the main article. 1175.1's schizophrenia is solved by [[1175.1]] redirecting to [[4.0.1175.1]] which would be a disambiguation. Buildtag conflicts between NT and 9x should be solved by disambiguations.
 
# The old-fashioned name should redirect to the new article name for compatibility reasons for already existing articles.
 
# Windows 1.x, 2.x and early NT 3.1 should be solved on an individual basis. We can't use build numbers when they don't have any.
 
Some guidelines that would govern codenames should be probably added as well, would be nice to search for <code>Chicago 40e</code> and land instantly on <code>[[Windows:95:40e|Windows 95 build 40e]]</code>. Currently the preferred article comes last in the results.
 
 
 
I hope I expressed my mind well enough, now it's your turn to hate me for this. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 23:34, 18 April 2017 (BST)
 
 
 
=== Support ===
 
# I agree with this. --[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]])
 
# This is actually a very sane proposal, and I agree with this as well. I did have a few doubts about post-RTM builds, but these were cleared up elsewhere. [[User:Recycle.bin|Recycle.bin]] ([[User talk:Recycle.bin|talk]]) 19:09, 22 April 2017 (BST)
 
# Done. [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 01:26, 25 April 2017 (BST)
 
 
 
=== Oppose ===
 
#
 
=== Discussion ===
 
 
 
== Broken gallery in articles ==
 
 
 
In a lot of pages the gallery is broken because it should be like this:
 
 
 
<nowiki><gallery>
 
content
 
</gallery></nowiki>
 
 
 
And not like
 
 
 
<nowiki><gallery>
 
content
 
<gallery></nowiki>
 
 
 
This is because we used to have an old MediaWiki version that worked like that, however with the new version, it must end with <nowiki></gallery></nowiki> or it will be broken. Anyone who finds such an article please try to fix it. Thanks. --[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]])
 
 
 
: Will do. -[[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 19:15, 3 October 2017 (BST)
 
 
 
== We got a wiki copying us ==
 
  
[http://osesbeta.wikia.com/wiki/ This wiki] only has one user who does nothing but completely copys and paste content of this wiki and only seems to be a fork out of this wiki. It also says that this wiki is bad and that all users use that wiki. I do have a FANDOM/Wikia account and thus can request action to staff of FANDOM. Should I take action against this because unlike other copys of wikis, this one seems to be up to date.
+
There seems to be some inconsistency in the naming of articles covering versions of Windows that have been cancelled and therefore are referred to by their codenames. There is [[Windows Nashville]], [[Windows Neptune]], but then we have [[Microsoft Cairo]] and I think it would be nice if we agreed on a single standard regarding these. I am not going to make this a simple yes/no vote, since this needs to be discussed thoroughly.
  
[[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 00:04, 11 October 2017 (BST)
+
Personally I am leaning towards removing the Windows/Microsoft component from the names, i.e. "Cairo", "Neptune build 5111", in order to make it clear that it wasn't a part of the codename. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 17:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 +
:Well for one thing, the boot screen of [[Windows Neptune build 5111.1]] refers itself as Microsoft Neptune, but Windows Neptune on the desktop buildtag too. I feel like Windows should be used on builds that have at least one released build but Microsoft for stuff like Blackcomb and Odyssey. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 17:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 +
::In my opinion we should use the Windows prefix for everything to separate these projects from things completely unrelated to Windows (such as Microsoft Midori). In fact, if you look at some of the antitrust documents for Neptune/Odyssey, you will see Microsoft reffering to them as ''Windows NT "NepTune"'' and ''Windows NT "Odyssey"'', not ''Microsoft NT''. In my opinion we should use Windows for everything, that was clearly intended as a version of Windows. Cairo is a special case though, as it did not refer to a single version of Windows, instead being a set of components. I am not entirely sure what to do with that. --[[User:Cvolton|Cvolton]] ([[User talk:Cvolton|talk]]) 21:51, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  
: We already know about it, see [[BetaWiki:Community_portal#Fork]], and no, there's not much we can do about it, just ignore it. --[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]])
+
== Windows RT builds ==
:If you can report it to the Wikia staff, please do. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 17:47, 15 October 2017 (BST)
 
::I just realized on BillyHatcher2012's page (Raffine2014) he has RTM & Beta keys. There no RTM keys just ovctvct's keys copy-pasted. (Also, he/she (Not sure if it's a boy or girl) thinks the automated response is a real person.) [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2017 (BST)
 
::: Wonder if he checks this wiki anymore or if he's ip banned. [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 20:03, 26 October 2017 (BST)
 
:::: He's only blocked, meaning he can't edit, but he could still visit, and he uses a dynamic IP so a ban won't be too effective. Also http://osesbeta.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Raffine2014/Closing_Operating_System_Beta,_etc._Wiki  '''looks like it will get closed tomorrow.''' --[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]])
 
::::: He blocked me for saying "Hi BH2012 (BillyHatcher2012) A.K.A. AyamiOoruri29 A.K.A. Raffine2014." and this is what I get when I see i'm able to comment.
 
::::: "You cannot add a comment to the article.
 
::::: Your user name or IP address has been blocked.
 
::::: The block was made by 165.138.70.5.
 
::::: Reason given: Spamming links to external sites: I know you're spammer, it is ovctvct or alphabeta. please get out on my wiki.
 
::::: Start of block: 11:50, August 18, 2017
 
::::: Expiry of block: infinity
 
::::: Intended blockee:
 
::::: Block ID: #6
 
::::: Current IP address: 165.138.70.5
 
::::: You can contact 165.138.70.5 or another administrator to discuss the block. Please include all details in the above box in any queries you make." WTF!? I didn't post a LINK! [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 15:47, 27 October 2017 (BST)
 
::::::Yep, looks like he is trying to block us in attempt to escape getting the wiki deleted. Looks like the wiki is nothing more than a joke and if it is not gone tomorrow, I have contacted Wikia Staff for major action. Even if he blocks me, that doesn't stop me from contacting Wikia Staff for copying a wiki. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 16:33, 27 October 2017 (BST)
 
:::::::: Seriously '''saying I'm a spammer and I posted one message. THE REASON SAID SPAMMING LINKS TO EXTERNAL SITES!''' Admin Abuse at it's finest. [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 15:17, 30 October 2017 (GMT)
 
::::::::: Turns out he didn't close the wiki today. Instead he will lock it from editing. I'm sure that he is still trying to keep it open. I also got a response, which was nothing more than "contact the admin on community.wikia.com or go [http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Special:DMCARequest here]" [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 18:37, 28 October 2017 (BST)
 
:::::::::: Contact the admin. Nuff said. [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 12:53, 30 October 2017 (GMT)
 
::::::::::: "The User creator of AlphaBeta." The '''USER CREATOR''' of AlphaBeta. So someone created AlphaBeta. Does this person know english? [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 15:20, 30 October 2017 (GMT)
 
:::::::::::: Also she (She's a she) copied stuff from BAWiki and BW (BetaWiki) including the Hall of Shame for some reason because basically everything that she types should be there. [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 16:10, 30 October 2017 (GMT)
 
::::::::::::: Wonder if she checks the communtiy portal? If so than Hi! [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 19:04, 31 October 2017 (GMT)
 
  
== Check icons ==
+
Does anyone have a trustworthy list of Windows RT builds? I want them for my [[User:MCpillager/Sandbox/Windows RT|Windows RT]] page.--<code>[[User:MCpillager|MCpillager]] ([[User talk:MCpillager|talk]]) ([[User:MCpillager/Sandbox|Sandbox]]) <span style="color:darkred;">1004065811 bytes of data </span></code> 14:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 +
:Before you get any further with this, I'd like to mention that the current agreement is that Windows RT builds will be listed on the [[Windows 8]] page, as they're nothing more than a different SKU of Windows 8. So if you wish to create a separate page for that, I'd suggest you to discuss that in the first place. --[[User:Cvolton|Cvolton]] ([[User Talk:Cvolton|talk]] | [[special:contributions/Cvolton|contribs]]) 21:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  
I found 2 unused icons for programs in Windows 1.0 Development Release 5. [[File:SuperMAN.PNG]] [[File:ALEIN.PNG]] I already put them up in the article. [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 14:29, 19 December 2017 (GMT)
+
== Memphis build 1481 ==
: We need to check icons. [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 14:29, 19 December 2017 (GMT)
 
  
== An error ==
+
Does Memphis build 1481 exists? BA user sonicridersuser claims to have this build, [https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=3128&p=31714#p31714 here]. --[[User:MCpillager|MCpillager]] ([[User talk:MCpillager|talk]]) ([[User:MCpillager/Sandbox|Sandbox]]) <span style="color:darkred;font-family:Courier">Me discover fire, invent wheel, build server.</span> 09:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  
I noticed an error. Earlier the website had broken links, and broken text. Like temporary text for translation. Now i'ts ok.
+
== Deletion policy ==
:Also, I can't upload images anymore. If I try to upload I get "The file you uploaded seems to be empty. This might be due to a typo in the filename. Please check whether you really want to upload this file." Seems to be an error with MediaWiki or one of this wikis components. I am not the admin or creator so I need someone to deal with this. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 20:48, 30 December 2017 (GMT)
 
  
== BAN HIM ==
+
Everybody please review the new [[BetaWiki:Deletion policy|Deletion policy]]. It defines exact reasons under which an article is eligible for quick deletion, which should prevent further confusion. Thanks. --[[User:Ryuzaki|Ryuzaki]] ([[User talk:Ryuzaki|talk]]) 16:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  
HE DELETES PAGES AND CALLS HIMSELF SOMEONE FROM MICROSOFT. HIS : MICROSOFT LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE.
+
== New restrictions on user pages ==
  
BAN HIM.
+
Beginning today, we are limiting user pages and subpages to '''registered users''' only. A major reason for this change is that many anonymous users are using dynamic IP addresses, which doesn't play well with our abuse filters blocking changes to user pages of other users. Many user pages ended up being abandoned due to this. We also feel that this change will motivate anonymous users to sign up for an account, which also brings several other benefits. Also worth mentioning is that this does not affect user ''talk'' pages, so anonymous users can still respond to messages that other users have left on their talk page.
  
Don't worry. I have already fired him.--[[Special:Contributions/192.241.163.23|192.241.163.23]] 08:55, 8 February 2018 (GMT)
+
Existing IP user pages will be kept for at least 30 days from now, after which we will start deleting them. I would also love to use this opportunity to remind everybody that while it's perfectly okay to use your user page and subpages to talk about your interests, keep track of your work on BetaWiki or use it as a sandbox, it's certainly not okay to talk about WNR fantasies or similar topics that could lead visitors to confusion. Such pages can and will be deleted in order to prevent user confusion.
  
who are you?
+
Thanks for flying BetaWiki. --[[User:Ryuzaki|Ryuzaki]] ([[User talk:Ryuzaki|talk]]) 23:11, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
  
I am a public relations manager from Microsoft. --[[Special:Contributions/192.241.163.23|192.241.163.23]] 09:07, 8 February 2018 (GMT)
+
== Stop talking about MCpillager ==
  
Ok. Do you know some cancelled projects? I have no info about you.
+
Seriously, he just gets angry when you make fun of him. Don't make fun of him, don't talk about him. If he vandalizes, block and revert, that's all. Don't take the piss out of him, don't insult him behind his back, as it only makes him angrier and inspires him to vandalize more. An admin WILL punish people who insult MCpillager, or make fun of him.
  
 +
To MCpillager, take this as a "gesture of peace". --[[User:Dolphin01|Dolphin01]] ([[User talk:Dolphin01|talk]]) 07:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  
"Microsoft Legal Representative threatens BetaWiki: Only to be fired miuntes later"LEL
+
:I'll remind you that you do not get to tell the admins here what to do.--[[User:Overdoze|Overdoze]] ([[User talk:Overdoze|talk]]) 08:34, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
:Ok, this IP battle is getting strange. I have no idea why they are doing this even though they can salt it all over on WinWorldPC or real BetaArchive. I will hope Oct or Alpha bans him and the IP adresses he is using to evade bans. This really wants to make me get temporary rights to ban these vandals until he never comes back. He is not a real Microsoft employee and likely a sock of Langham or BillyHatcher. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 13:04, 8 February 2018 (GMT)
+
:I show myself a "gesture of peace" as well. Good try. --[[User:Ryuzaki|Ryuzaki]] ([[User talk:Ryuzaki|talk]]) 13:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
: Unfortunately this person uses a whole new IP every time so there is no way to really ban him, all we could do is to contact his ISP or something. --[[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]]) 14:34, 8 February 2018 (GMT)
+
Dude its true. That explains raptides vandal attacks.[[Special:Contributions/103.6.158.186|103.6.158.186]] 13:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 +
:Nice try again. Also, even then we have our moderation queue to deal with users who aren't automoderated. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 14:54, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
  
== Cleanup the old naming scheme ==
+
== Moderation ==
  
If anyone has a script or bot that can help with changing old naming schemes like "Windows:7" to "Windows 7" and "Windows:NT4.0:1500" to "Windows NT 4.0 build 1500", that would be appreciated. It's everywhere in Windows Vista and later articles and cleaning it up isn't an easy task. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 22:39, 3 September 2018 (BST)
+
Due to targeted vandalism attacks on BetaWiki, we were forced to tighten some stuff:  
:Likewise, if anyone has a bot or script to replace the "bios" to "compiled" in for infoboxes alongside correcting the date, it would be well great if that can be used. Like I said though, it is expected to set the bios dates back by 1, not just replace all references of "bios" to "compiled". [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 15:28, 15 January 2019 (GMT)
+
* Most edits will now end up in a moderation queue. Staff has the right to make your edits go through directly once they deem you are trusted. Staff will '''not''' use this mechanism to do any sort of quality control (bad grammar etc.), as we believe in openness and the revert mechanism is better suited for that. '''Only''' blatant vandalism will be rejected in the moderation.
::Just finished cleaning up the old naming system for all Windows builds in one of the most cumbersome ways possible, since [[:wikipedia:Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser|AutoWikiBrowser]] refused to log me in here. The only pages in use with the old naming space now are [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds]] and its subpages - [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:9xxx]], [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:100xx]] and [[Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:10xxx]]. --[[User:Cvolton|Cvolton]] ([[User talk:Cvolton|talk]]) 21:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
+
* We made some behind-the-scenes changes for better performance and security. We ask all users to report if anything doesn't work or behaves weirdly.
 
 
== I know I'm bringing this up again but... ==
 
 
 
Hahaha. http://osesbeta.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Raffine2014/Leaving_Operating_System_Beta,_etc._Wiki --[[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 13:39, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 
:I have a good feeling it was fake though. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 13:45, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 
::That was in 2017. [[User:LarryTN7722|LarryTN7722]] ([[User talk:LarryTN7722|talk]]) 13:52, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 
:::Oh lol, guess he's stupid enough to "block" himself. Who's gonna miss his ripoff wiki anyway? -[[User:ATeamInc|ATeamInc]] ([[User talk:ATeamInc|talk]]) 14:55, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
 
  
== Oh, look at this ==
+
Sorry for any inconvenience, but this was unfortunately necessary. We want to keep BetaWiki open to casual edits by everyone.
  
https://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page I'm just gonna leave this here, lol. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 11:53, 2 December 2018 (GMT)
+
--[[User:Ryuzaki|Ryuzaki]] ([[User talk:Ryuzaki|talk]]) 13:57, 8 June 2019 (UTC) <small>(originally written by [[User:JaGoTu|JaGoTu]] on the [https://discord.gg/8GuGW5Z BetaWiki Discord])</small>
  
== Merge Longhorn and Vista ==
+
:This is just disappointing, how people (like the people that vandalized pages) want to ruin things and cause things like this to happen. I do agree with what you did though, hopefully vandalism will stop. -[[User:Meow|Meow]] ([[User talk:Meow|talk]]) 19:07, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 +
:It hasn't gone unnoticed that several users have been promoted to "automoderated users". Contributions of these users don't pass through the moderation queue and are applied directly as if no moderation mechanism has been introduced. Users can request these permissions at the [[BetaWiki:Administrators' noticeboard|administrators' noticeboard]], where we will evaluate their past contributions and promote them if they are deemed to be trusted. --[[User:Ryuzaki|Ryuzaki]] ([[User talk:Ryuzaki|talk]]) 19:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  
There has been a debate on the Discord regarding this. IMHO we should merge [[Windows Longhorn]] into [[Windows Vista]], since even though many ideas such as WinFS that were planned for Longhorn didn't make it to Vista, a lot of them did. This is even noticeable in the terminology used to refer to the development phases: "development reset" implies that the project has been ''restarted'', not ''scrapped''. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 17:11, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
+
== Removing "RTM Update" builds ==
  
 +
After seeing some of these recent new Windows build pages, I feel like the "RTM Update" pages has to go. Most of these RTM Update pages are from Windows Update, and since there are over thousands of updates for each version of Windows, documenting RTM Update builds will take an extremely long time with Windows versions above 2000 having about 1000 pages worth of RTM Update builds. In case you don't know what I mean, here are some examples:
 +
*[[Windows 2000 build 2195.7397]]
 +
*[[Windows XP build 2600.7259]]
 +
*[[Windows Vista build 6001.18702]]
 +
*[[Windows Server 2003 build 3790.5190]]
 +
*[[Windows 8.1 build 9600.31213]]
 +
Do note that there are some builds that will be specifically staying. Any betas of Service Packs will stay (including the Spring 2014 Update of Windows 8.1 and Server 2012 R2), as they are still betas and achieve our goal of documenting betas. [[Windows Server 2008 build 6003.20489]] is also a special exception that will stay on this wiki due to the unique build number update. However, most of the remaining Update RTM builds should be removed as they only add more clutter to the wiki. I have a good feeling most of the RTM Update builds are also buildlist builds. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 14:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 
=== Support ===
 
=== Support ===
# [[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 17:11, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
+
#[[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 14:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
# [[User:Ovctvct|Ovctvct]] ([[User talk:Ovctvct|talk]]) 17:21, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
+
#[[User:Overdoze|Overdoze]] ([[User talk:Overdoze|talk]]) 18:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
# [[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 17:34, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
+
#<templatestyles src="User:Ryuzaki/Signature/styles.css"/>[[User:Ryuzaki|<span class="signature-ryuzaki-userpage">Ryuzaki</span>]] <span class="signature-ryuzaki-links">([[User talk:Ryuzaki|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ryuzaki|contribs]])</span> 19:01, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
# TCB also does this too, so we might as well have it like that. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 19:01, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
+
#[[User:Wheatley|Wheatley]] ([[User talk:Wheatley|talk]]) 19:03, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  
 
=== Oppose ===
 
=== Oppose ===
# [[User:LarryTN7722|LarryTN7722]] ([[User talk:LarryTN7722|talk]]) 03:04, 23 December 2018 (GMT)
 
 
== Itanium and DEC Alpha users wanted ==
 
 
Since some builds such as [[Windows 2000 build 1855.1]] and the Windows XP 64-Bit builds needs special architectures that can only be done on real hardware. If anyone has necessary hardware to run these builds, that would be appreciated to get them installed and provide images of the build. [[User:BF10|BF10]] ([[User talk:BF10|talk]]) 20:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 
 
== Android and other misc operating systems need Infoboxs. ==
 
 
They can't be the same quality as the Windows and Mac ones. Also, the Mac ones need updating. --[[User:LilShootDawg|LilShootDawg]] ([[User talk:LilShootDawg|talk]]) 03:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 
 
== Suggestion for the Longhorn/Vista build pages ==
 
 
Because Windows Vista was codenamed Longhorn and both pages have been merged, we should replace all references in all pre-reset pages from Longhorn to Vista.
 
Do you think we should do it? [[Special:Contributions/2.30.192.61|2.30.192.61]] 19:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 
 
===Support===
 
===Oppose===
 
# [[User:LarryTN7722|LarryTN7722]] ([[User talk:LarryTN7722|talk]]) 05:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 
# [[User:Caveria|Caveria]] ([[User talk:Caveria|talk]]) 12:31, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 
 
===Discussions===
 
===Questions===
 

Revision as of 19:03, 15 July 2019

Cleanup the old naming scheme

If anyone has a script or bot that can help with changing old naming schemes like "Windows:7" to "Windows 7" and "Windows:NT4.0:1500" to "Windows NT 4.0 build 1500", that would be appreciated. It's everywhere in Windows Vista and later articles and cleaning it up isn't an easy task. BF10 (talk) 22:39, 3 September 2018 (BST)

Likewise, if anyone has a bot or script to replace the "bios" to "compiled" in for infoboxes alongside correcting the date, it would be well great if that can be used. Like I said though, it is expected to set the bios dates back by 1, not just replace all references of "bios" to "compiled". BF10 (talk) 15:28, 15 January 2019 (GMT)
Just finished cleaning up the old naming system for all Windows builds in one of the most cumbersome ways possible, since AutoWikiBrowser refused to log me in here. The only pages in use with the old naming space now are Windows:10:Windows Update Builds and its subpages - Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:9xxx, Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:100xx and Windows:10:Windows Update Builds:10xxx. --Cvolton (talk) 21:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning that up. Now all I have to do is to choose how we name the update build pages. BF10 (talk) 23:36, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

I know I'm bringing this up again but...

Hahaha. http://osesbeta.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Raffine2014/Leaving_Operating_System_Beta,_etc._Wiki --LilShootDawg (talk) 13:39, 20 November 2018 (GMT)

I have a good feeling it was fake though. BF10 (talk) 13:45, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
That was in 2017. LarryTN7722 (talk) 13:52, 20 November 2018 (GMT)
Oh lol, guess he's stupid enough to "block" himself. Who's gonna miss his ripoff wiki anyway? -ATeamInc (talk) 14:55, 20 November 2018 (GMT)

Oh, look at this

https://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page I'm just gonna leave this here, lol. --AlphaBeta (talk) 11:53, 2 December 2018 (GMT)

Merge Longhorn and Vista

There has been a debate on the Discord regarding this. IMHO we should merge Windows Longhorn into Windows Vista, since even though many ideas such as WinFS that were planned for Longhorn didn't make it to Vista, a lot of them did. This is even noticeable in the terminology used to refer to the development phases: "development reset" implies that the project has been restarted, not scrapped. --AlphaBeta (talk) 17:11, 22 December 2018 (GMT)

Support

  1. AlphaBeta (talk) 17:11, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
  2. Ovctvct (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
  3. LilShootDawg (talk) 17:34, 22 December 2018 (GMT)
  4. TCB also does this too, so we might as well have it like that. BF10 (talk) 19:01, 22 December 2018 (GMT)

Oppose

  1. LarryTN7722 (talk) 03:04, 23 December 2018 (GMT)

Itanium and DEC Alpha users wanted

Since some builds such as Windows 2000 build 1855.1 and the Windows XP 64-Bit builds needs special architectures that can only be done on real hardware. If anyone has necessary hardware to run these builds, that would be appreciated to get them installed and provide images of the build. BF10 (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Android and other misc operating systems need Infoboxes.

They don't have any. Also, the Mac ones need updating. --LilShootDawg (talk) 03:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

ToMi and I made infoboxes for NeXTSTEP, Android, and MS-DOS.--MCpillager (talk) (Sandbox) 1004065811 bytes of data 14:19, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion for the Longhorn/Vista build pages

Because Windows Vista was codenamed Longhorn and both pages have been merged, we should replace all references in all pre-reset pages from Longhorn to Vista. Do you think we should do it? 2.30.192.61 19:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

  1. LarryTN7722 (talk) 05:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
  2. Caveria (talk) 12:31, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Discussions

Questions

Suggestions for infoboxes on build pages.

On infoboxes on build pages (for every operating system) we should add which build came before it and what came after it. I will leave a poll below so people can decide whether it is any good. 2.28.175.216 17:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

  1. We already have done this in the past and it was hard to maintain it. The next/previous settings had to be removed for a good reason. BF10 (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  2. Actually, I Symbol oppose vote.png Oppose it too. If you keep adding builds to pages (like with the Windows 10 pages) you would have to find the build before it (with an article) and edit the next/previous setting. This would be inaccurate for builds in between without articles. --2.28.175.216 14:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

CLOSED

Cancelled versions of Windows

There seems to be some inconsistency in the naming of articles covering versions of Windows that have been cancelled and therefore are referred to by their codenames. There is Windows Nashville, Windows Neptune, but then we have Microsoft Cairo and I think it would be nice if we agreed on a single standard regarding these. I am not going to make this a simple yes/no vote, since this needs to be discussed thoroughly.

Personally I am leaning towards removing the Windows/Microsoft component from the names, i.e. "Cairo", "Neptune build 5111", in order to make it clear that it wasn't a part of the codename. --AlphaBeta (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Well for one thing, the boot screen of Windows Neptune build 5111.1 refers itself as Microsoft Neptune, but Windows Neptune on the desktop buildtag too. I feel like Windows should be used on builds that have at least one released build but Microsoft for stuff like Blackcomb and Odyssey. BF10 (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
In my opinion we should use the Windows prefix for everything to separate these projects from things completely unrelated to Windows (such as Microsoft Midori). In fact, if you look at some of the antitrust documents for Neptune/Odyssey, you will see Microsoft reffering to them as Windows NT "NepTune" and Windows NT "Odyssey", not Microsoft NT. In my opinion we should use Windows for everything, that was clearly intended as a version of Windows. Cairo is a special case though, as it did not refer to a single version of Windows, instead being a set of components. I am not entirely sure what to do with that. --Cvolton (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Windows RT builds

Does anyone have a trustworthy list of Windows RT builds? I want them for my Windows RT page.--MCpillager (talk) (Sandbox) 1004065811 bytes of data 14:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Before you get any further with this, I'd like to mention that the current agreement is that Windows RT builds will be listed on the Windows 8 page, as they're nothing more than a different SKU of Windows 8. So if you wish to create a separate page for that, I'd suggest you to discuss that in the first place. --Cvolton (talk | contribs) 21:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Memphis build 1481

Does Memphis build 1481 exists? BA user sonicridersuser claims to have this build, here. --MCpillager (talk) (Sandbox) Me discover fire, invent wheel, build server. 09:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Deletion policy

Everybody please review the new Deletion policy. It defines exact reasons under which an article is eligible for quick deletion, which should prevent further confusion. Thanks. --Ryuzaki (talk) 16:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

New restrictions on user pages

Beginning today, we are limiting user pages and subpages to registered users only. A major reason for this change is that many anonymous users are using dynamic IP addresses, which doesn't play well with our abuse filters blocking changes to user pages of other users. Many user pages ended up being abandoned due to this. We also feel that this change will motivate anonymous users to sign up for an account, which also brings several other benefits. Also worth mentioning is that this does not affect user talk pages, so anonymous users can still respond to messages that other users have left on their talk page.

Existing IP user pages will be kept for at least 30 days from now, after which we will start deleting them. I would also love to use this opportunity to remind everybody that while it's perfectly okay to use your user page and subpages to talk about your interests, keep track of your work on BetaWiki or use it as a sandbox, it's certainly not okay to talk about WNR fantasies or similar topics that could lead visitors to confusion. Such pages can and will be deleted in order to prevent user confusion.

Thanks for flying BetaWiki. --Ryuzaki (talk) 23:11, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Stop talking about MCpillager

Seriously, he just gets angry when you make fun of him. Don't make fun of him, don't talk about him. If he vandalizes, block and revert, that's all. Don't take the piss out of him, don't insult him behind his back, as it only makes him angrier and inspires him to vandalize more. An admin WILL punish people who insult MCpillager, or make fun of him.

To MCpillager, take this as a "gesture of peace". --Dolphin01 (talk) 07:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

I'll remind you that you do not get to tell the admins here what to do.--Overdoze (talk) 08:34, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I show myself a "gesture of peace" as well. Good try. --Ryuzaki (talk) 13:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Dude its true. That explains raptides vandal attacks.103.6.158.186 13:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Nice try again. Also, even then we have our moderation queue to deal with users who aren't automoderated. BF10 (talk) 14:54, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Moderation

Due to targeted vandalism attacks on BetaWiki, we were forced to tighten some stuff:

  • Most edits will now end up in a moderation queue. Staff has the right to make your edits go through directly once they deem you are trusted. Staff will not use this mechanism to do any sort of quality control (bad grammar etc.), as we believe in openness and the revert mechanism is better suited for that. Only blatant vandalism will be rejected in the moderation.
  • We made some behind-the-scenes changes for better performance and security. We ask all users to report if anything doesn't work or behaves weirdly.

Sorry for any inconvenience, but this was unfortunately necessary. We want to keep BetaWiki open to casual edits by everyone.

--Ryuzaki (talk) 13:57, 8 June 2019 (UTC) (originally written by JaGoTu on the BetaWiki Discord)

This is just disappointing, how people (like the people that vandalized pages) want to ruin things and cause things like this to happen. I do agree with what you did though, hopefully vandalism will stop. -Meow (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
It hasn't gone unnoticed that several users have been promoted to "automoderated users". Contributions of these users don't pass through the moderation queue and are applied directly as if no moderation mechanism has been introduced. Users can request these permissions at the administrators' noticeboard, where we will evaluate their past contributions and promote them if they are deemed to be trusted. --Ryuzaki (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Removing "RTM Update" builds

After seeing some of these recent new Windows build pages, I feel like the "RTM Update" pages has to go. Most of these RTM Update pages are from Windows Update, and since there are over thousands of updates for each version of Windows, documenting RTM Update builds will take an extremely long time with Windows versions above 2000 having about 1000 pages worth of RTM Update builds. In case you don't know what I mean, here are some examples:

Do note that there are some builds that will be specifically staying. Any betas of Service Packs will stay (including the Spring 2014 Update of Windows 8.1 and Server 2012 R2), as they are still betas and achieve our goal of documenting betas. Windows Server 2008 build 6003.20489 is also a special exception that will stay on this wiki due to the unique build number update. However, most of the remaining Update RTM builds should be removed as they only add more clutter to the wiki. I have a good feeling most of the RTM Update builds are also buildlist builds. BF10 (talk) 14:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Support

  1. BF10 (talk) 14:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  2. Overdoze (talk) 18:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  3. Ryuzaki (talk | contribs) 19:01, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  4. Wheatley (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Oppose