Talk:Panorama Tools

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Panorama Tools article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

This page is not a forum for general discussion about the opinion of the software or community, external debates, or anything else that does not comply with Wikipedia discussion page policies. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about the opinion of the software or community, external debates, or anything else that does not comply with Wikipedia discussion page policies at the Reference desk.

Archives

PanoTools/Panotools redirects

Just a short information. Mr. John Spikowski removed the redirects for PanoTools and Panotools to this article with the old claims that he is the PanoTools Group and he put links to his and other sites into it. If you are not familiar with his claims you may read http://www.panotools.org/debunk . This is clearly a violation of WP:NPOV and WP:COI and It looks like he wants to spread his edit wars over a broader range of articles. --Wuz 16:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This behaviour is reprehensible. John, stop being disruptive.-Localzuk^(talk) 16:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We have now got Wuz, myself, Anomie and JLaTrondre all saying that the redirect and the dismabiguation page is incorrect. So I think that any further attempts by John to make that page into someting which isn't practical should be simply reverted and him be warned that his behaviour is inappropriate. If he can come up with a reason to maintain those 2 page as seperate articles then so be it, but changing from redirect to disambiguation page or cross-namespace redirect won't stand.-Localzuk^(talk) 13:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PanoTools named copyright?

John, you do not own a copyright of the PanoTools name. Keep in mind Wikipedia policies majorly look down upon these kinds of actions. Please just leave the PanoTools name in the PanoTools article. Roguegeek (talk) 21:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created the PanoTools group in Feb. 2003 when Helmut shutdown his list. The PanoTools group is well known in the panorama community as a panorama portal. The members found it easier to just use PanoTools instead of using the proper name for the software. The PanoTools name is copyrighted (see bottom of site) and the name of the site. The NG group took the secondary domain names and assumed another groups identity. These are undisputed facts. Maybe you should ask Helmut if he ever intended his Panorama Tools software to be renamed. It's sad that a slang of a product name has become more popular then the original name given. John Spikowski 21:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The source forge project is called both PanoTools and Panorama Tools. Beyond that, due to your conflict of interest and continuous violation of that policy, I'm not so sure you are even suppose to be editting the article to begin with. This is something that has already been proven in other questionable articles that were brought to administrator's attention. Whatever the case is, it's very common knowledge everyone calls the software PanoTools (a major reason why that name re-directs there) and is shown on both community sites and the official source forge page. I've started a report to submit on your conflict of interest violations to submit if this kind of activity is to continue. All these kinds of action do is support that report if it were ever submitted. Please help all of the editors involved with the subject and just let it be. Thanks. Roguegeek (talk) 21:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John has decided to nominate the PanoTools article for deletion. Obviously, this isn't going to go through with the admins, but I suggest other editors still voice their opinion in the discussion found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PanoTools. Roguegeek (talk) 22:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The clear result after more than three hours (3h 18 min) debate is: AFD not applicable. If that was not clear enough, John now nominated the redirect PanoTools as RFD. --Einemnet 07:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to point out that names are not subject to copyright protection, and any claim that a name is "copyrighted" is specious. -- Coneslayer 14:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rich,

While I agree that disputes external to the Wikipedia should remain external, the facts are still important and should be stated without bias or malice. The PanoTools group has a mailing list on Yahoo groups and the group site (Mailman) which is used for announcements. The PanoTools Next Generation group has a mailing list (PanoToolsNG) on Yahoo groups but maintains archives (without permission) from the original PanoTools group. This is currently being worked out with the PanoTools.org hosting company and should be resolved soon. Any references to posts made to the original PanoTools Yahoo group list should point to the correct archives. JS 05:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]