Talk:Zipeg

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

No consensus for deletion, 18 August 2009, see discussion.
Delete, 7 November 2007, see discussion.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

Notability?

I didn't want to put the Notability tag on the article's page without giving you the chance to discuss it here first, but I somehow doubt that Zipeg deserves inclusion in Wikipedia. As I see it, it uses 7-Zip as a back end, and does nothing special that other software wouldn't do. I believe that something like WinRK (with near-top compression rates) would be a more worthy entry, but its entry was removed (which does not mean that I vote for re-inclusion of WinRK here - it's just a comparison to illustrate my point that the Zipeg entry is not worthwhile). Anyone to disagree? ;-) 84.46.14.202 (talk) 14:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymity?

Dear 84.46.14.202 (do you have a name?)

* WinZip was (and mostly still is) thin layer of GUI in front of freeware Info zip. Right?
* Please check http://zipeg.googlecode.com/ to see how much I worked to make 7-zip right and do other things around it.
* 7-zip itself is a thin layer of code around 95% of free stuff collected all over the internet. and so is Wikipedia...
* If you do not think Zipeg is notable try to take sample.zip from inside windows zipeg installation and unpack it with _any_ other software. Any luck with national alphabet filenames yet?
* Zipeg is downloaded and used by at least couple of million people (according to my server logs). Winzip copy-cat thumbnails preview features from Zipeg.

I guess all of this does not make Zipeg notable at all. Hope to know you by name one day 84.46.14.202

PS: Do not forget to remove The Unarchiver, 7-zip, and WinZip articles. Sincerely Leo Kuznetsov Leo.Kuznetsov (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability again

Because voting and appeals closed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zipeg_(2nd_nomination) and I discovered substantial feature set in my own code (yes I wrote it). I had to fix 7-zip code in many places and 7-zip code itself is not very notable being mostly the collection of other open sources. I probably should not vote for notability of my own code couple of things Zipeg does that other archivers do NOT are:

heuristic recognition of code-page encoded national filenames: http://zipeg.com/zipeg.2.0.ss/zipeg_filenames_compare.png
reading EXIF thumbnails from JPEG files (which significantly speeds up thumbnail generation comparing to downscaling multi megapixel image).

Leo.Kuznetsov (talk) 23:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reviews

I removed links to softsea and rBytes "reviews" of Zipeg that were not actual reviews at all. If somebody thinks the reviews are needed here are some sources with more or less real reviews: http://en.onsoftware.com/preview-images-in-compressed-files/ http://zipeg.en.softonic.com/ http://www.musingsfrommars.org/2007/01/zipeg-browse-and-preview-archive-files.html?cat=76

Leo.Kuznetsov (talk) 01:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]