Talk:MindMapper
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MindMapper article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
mindmapping.typepad.com
[edit]How does this meet WP:RS? --Ronz (talk) 20:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Patrickkoh (talk) 03:38, 24 October 2008 (UTC) I'd appreciate all input and advice to make this MindMapper wiki page a reality. Can you give more details on what is needed? The standard messages are not providing much information. The Mind Map page of this wiki lists other mind mapping software vendors, such as NovaMind, MindMeister, OpenMind, ConceptDraw MINDMAP, etc, who also are missing the info that is requested for MindMapper page, but the other pages are still up and live. So what gives? What can I add to satisfy the wiki gods...? Patrickkoh (talk) 03:38, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding. Yes, it looks like many or most of the mind mapping software articles are poorly sourced. In each case, we need to meet WP:N by providing multiple, independent, reliable sources. --Ronz (talk) 03:59, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- MindMapper is one of the top 3 Mind Mapping applications in the market. People in the industry are well aware of this product. I'll add more sources into the article Patrickkoh (talk) 13:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed the notability tag given we now have three reviews. --Ronz (talk) 14:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- MindMapper is one of the top 3 Mind Mapping applications in the market. People in the industry are well aware of this product. I'll add more sources into the article Patrickkoh (talk) 13:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, I still must disagree with some of the tags placed here
- additional references - there are 3 already
- reads like an advertisement - I don't see that in the article. It is just straight facts
- conflict of interest - again, it's just facts. There are no opinions or subjective information
Patrickkoh (talk) 15:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- I've been letting you slide with your coi. If other editors see what you've done and decide to block you, don't be surprised. --Ronz (talk) 15:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
External links modified (January 2018)
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MindMapper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090206103624/http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2Farchive%2Fc0511%2F40c11%2F40c11.asp&guid to http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles%2Farchive%2Fc0511%2F40c11%2F40c11.asp&guid
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)