This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Outliner 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: | ||||||||||
|
I see this phrase at the beginning of the article: "Mind Mappers and Wikis are related types of software." ... I agree with mind mappers, but not really with wikis... I do not know of a wiki that would offer outliner capabilities. Including this one for a start. wikis do not offer as a typical feature the ability to manage hierarchies neither to expand/collapse them nor to manipulate these trees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pombredanne ( talk • contribs) 09:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I added two links under the Macintosh only site: Notebook (Circus Ponies) and Notetaker (Aquaminds). Feel free to edit the name, but these are certainly pieces of software that should be included in the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.252.102.194 ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 16 July 2005
TVO is described as a better vim-based outliner than Vim Outliner/VMO. I'm curious about the reason for this. I use VMO a little bit, but am not strongly biased either way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.47.241 ( talk • contribs) 03:36, 22 July 2005
Suggestion: Perhaps there should be a reference to Dave Winer as well as Doug Engelbart?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.175.204.98 ( talk • contribs) 11:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC2)
Commercial interests here, which is almost OK. There's no claim of notoriety, just seems to be a fairly random selection that isn't authoritative, with the list getting long. See WP:NOT advertising. Widefox 11:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Could you add zavala ( https://github.com/vincode-io/Zavala and https://zavala.vincode.io/ )
2001:4C80:40:4B3:12E7:C6FF:FE21:80CF ( talk) 12:08, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
The commented-out section is either inaccurate or imprecise enough to be confusing. For example:
Article suggest most word processors have outliner built-in. Alas OpenOffice's Writer is still missing this feature as of Jan 2007 its been Number 3 on the wish list for the last 4 years ( [1]). 80.7.195.184 15:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I've removed a fairly staggering collection of commercial and promotional links that has gathered here over the last year. Please refer to WP:NOT and WP:EL before re-adding any links. If I've removed a link that improves the article and is not simply a vendor link, please start a discussion here. Kuru talk 05:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm visiting almost a year later and no more comments. But thank you (whoever you are) for leaving in these links. They are important to explorers of this form of information organizing. It would be great if a die-hard outliner lover would add some history and some key concepts in using this kind of software. Robert A. Yourell —Preceding comment was added at 09:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
This link, http://www.expandingbrain.com/wiki/doku.php seems broken (404, no redirection) -- 86.75.149.234 ( talk) 07:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC) ( |Hibou57)
Don't you think "Generally Acknowledged" is a bit weasel wordy? How do I add the (bracket)weasel words?(bracket) thing to that? I'd like to see it marked. It seems like we should have sources, not pretend that it is supposedly "generally acknowledged". Just so you know, I agree with the comment, but not with the wording. Ryaxnb ( talk) 18:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
When I searched for an item related to the topic of this article, I noticed the Google search result looks odd. Can someone fix this?
See: http://i.imgur.com/xH87OEy.png
-- RahiDelvi ( talk) 02:09, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
I would love to see the information on OPML support of desktop applications, like there is for the web-services. -- eugrus ( talk) 22:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
The article says in the first sentence: "An Outliner is a computer program". If I understood correctly what is an Outliner, it's a common feature in many Text-editors (like Notepad++) and IDE's (like Webstorm), so it's not necessarily solely a computer program. What do you think? Should the sentence be changed to "An Outliner is a computer program or feature"? Ben-Yeudith ( talk) 06:23, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
IMO the list of Outliners would be much more useful, if it had columns for each important platform (W, M, L, Python, POSIX, Web, other ...), and a "license" type column (GPL, BSD, PayWare, AbandonWare, FreeWare ...). Of the two, I find the license column has the highest value/effort ratio. I am aware, that the platform columns would be quite some work to choose the initial set, and keep that accurate, and therefore may not be desirable. The additional columns would be very helpful to separate the wheat from the old, unsupported/abandoned mono-platform commercial/non-free chaff. 88.207.143.25 ( talk) 17:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
The way 'hoist' is used in the article seems assume some definition other than physically lifting something up (per Wiktionary). Can we get an expert in this topic to add an example of what is meant in this case by 'hoist'?
Thanks, WesT ( talk) 19:52, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Why have a list of desktop outliners if quite a fraction of the entries concerns outdated products no longer available? Shouldn't we make a distinction between items of only technical or historical relevance and actual products currently available? Anyway, there seems to be only a small group of people still using desktop outliners today; most of them seem to be members of the outlinersoftware.com forum; so maybe we should ask these people which products are relevant? And do you really think that emacs org-mode is the right species representative to be presented in the top right display? A console application? Is this meant as a joke? 62.202.191.230 ( talk) 22:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC) R.K.
I have removed a list entry for the CrossLine outliner, a small 8-month old GitHub project without any independent sources to establish its notability. Without such sources such applications don't belong in an encyclopedia - Wikipedia is no venue to promote personal projects and minor applications. Please discuss here if needed. GermanJoe ( talk) 01:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
In my edit summary for this edit (which reverted a sudden addition of a massive collection of external links), I noted that the knowledge and effort that was used to amass all of those external links could be used instead to create a 'History' section that describes outliner history in prose, based on reliable secondary sources, per WP:V. I would be very interested to read such a history, and I imagine that I'm not alone in such interest. Biogeographist ( talk) 16:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Roam should be added as a web-based outliner. Ben Finn ( talk) 20:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Is the some reason the venerable PC Outline isn't listed here? TobyJ ( talk) 11:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Outliner 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: | ||||||||||
|
I see this phrase at the beginning of the article: "Mind Mappers and Wikis are related types of software." ... I agree with mind mappers, but not really with wikis... I do not know of a wiki that would offer outliner capabilities. Including this one for a start. wikis do not offer as a typical feature the ability to manage hierarchies neither to expand/collapse them nor to manipulate these trees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pombredanne ( talk • contribs) 09:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I added two links under the Macintosh only site: Notebook (Circus Ponies) and Notetaker (Aquaminds). Feel free to edit the name, but these are certainly pieces of software that should be included in the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.252.102.194 ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 16 July 2005
TVO is described as a better vim-based outliner than Vim Outliner/VMO. I'm curious about the reason for this. I use VMO a little bit, but am not strongly biased either way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.47.241 ( talk • contribs) 03:36, 22 July 2005
Suggestion: Perhaps there should be a reference to Dave Winer as well as Doug Engelbart?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.175.204.98 ( talk • contribs) 11:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC2)
Commercial interests here, which is almost OK. There's no claim of notoriety, just seems to be a fairly random selection that isn't authoritative, with the list getting long. See WP:NOT advertising. Widefox 11:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Could you add zavala ( https://github.com/vincode-io/Zavala and https://zavala.vincode.io/ )
2001:4C80:40:4B3:12E7:C6FF:FE21:80CF ( talk) 12:08, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
The commented-out section is either inaccurate or imprecise enough to be confusing. For example:
Article suggest most word processors have outliner built-in. Alas OpenOffice's Writer is still missing this feature as of Jan 2007 its been Number 3 on the wish list for the last 4 years ( [1]). 80.7.195.184 15:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I've removed a fairly staggering collection of commercial and promotional links that has gathered here over the last year. Please refer to WP:NOT and WP:EL before re-adding any links. If I've removed a link that improves the article and is not simply a vendor link, please start a discussion here. Kuru talk 05:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm visiting almost a year later and no more comments. But thank you (whoever you are) for leaving in these links. They are important to explorers of this form of information organizing. It would be great if a die-hard outliner lover would add some history and some key concepts in using this kind of software. Robert A. Yourell —Preceding comment was added at 09:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
This link, http://www.expandingbrain.com/wiki/doku.php seems broken (404, no redirection) -- 86.75.149.234 ( talk) 07:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC) ( |Hibou57)
Don't you think "Generally Acknowledged" is a bit weasel wordy? How do I add the (bracket)weasel words?(bracket) thing to that? I'd like to see it marked. It seems like we should have sources, not pretend that it is supposedly "generally acknowledged". Just so you know, I agree with the comment, but not with the wording. Ryaxnb ( talk) 18:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
When I searched for an item related to the topic of this article, I noticed the Google search result looks odd. Can someone fix this?
See: http://i.imgur.com/xH87OEy.png
-- RahiDelvi ( talk) 02:09, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
I would love to see the information on OPML support of desktop applications, like there is for the web-services. -- eugrus ( talk) 22:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
The article says in the first sentence: "An Outliner is a computer program". If I understood correctly what is an Outliner, it's a common feature in many Text-editors (like Notepad++) and IDE's (like Webstorm), so it's not necessarily solely a computer program. What do you think? Should the sentence be changed to "An Outliner is a computer program or feature"? Ben-Yeudith ( talk) 06:23, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
IMO the list of Outliners would be much more useful, if it had columns for each important platform (W, M, L, Python, POSIX, Web, other ...), and a "license" type column (GPL, BSD, PayWare, AbandonWare, FreeWare ...). Of the two, I find the license column has the highest value/effort ratio. I am aware, that the platform columns would be quite some work to choose the initial set, and keep that accurate, and therefore may not be desirable. The additional columns would be very helpful to separate the wheat from the old, unsupported/abandoned mono-platform commercial/non-free chaff. 88.207.143.25 ( talk) 17:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
The way 'hoist' is used in the article seems assume some definition other than physically lifting something up (per Wiktionary). Can we get an expert in this topic to add an example of what is meant in this case by 'hoist'?
Thanks, WesT ( talk) 19:52, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Why have a list of desktop outliners if quite a fraction of the entries concerns outdated products no longer available? Shouldn't we make a distinction between items of only technical or historical relevance and actual products currently available? Anyway, there seems to be only a small group of people still using desktop outliners today; most of them seem to be members of the outlinersoftware.com forum; so maybe we should ask these people which products are relevant? And do you really think that emacs org-mode is the right species representative to be presented in the top right display? A console application? Is this meant as a joke? 62.202.191.230 ( talk) 22:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC) R.K.
I have removed a list entry for the CrossLine outliner, a small 8-month old GitHub project without any independent sources to establish its notability. Without such sources such applications don't belong in an encyclopedia - Wikipedia is no venue to promote personal projects and minor applications. Please discuss here if needed. GermanJoe ( talk) 01:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
In my edit summary for this edit (which reverted a sudden addition of a massive collection of external links), I noted that the knowledge and effort that was used to amass all of those external links could be used instead to create a 'History' section that describes outliner history in prose, based on reliable secondary sources, per WP:V. I would be very interested to read such a history, and I imagine that I'm not alone in such interest. Biogeographist ( talk) 16:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Roam should be added as a web-based outliner. Ben Finn ( talk) 20:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Is the some reason the venerable PC Outline isn't listed here? TobyJ ( talk) 11:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)