156:
That was enormously helpful, thank you so much! I've reorganised the intro - the first para now tells the casual reader all that stuff by itself. I also merged all the minor discontinued forks into the big list (with some refs for further reading where warranted), leaving only the ones warranting
101:
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take it to GA or FA. I've worked quite hard on it over the last several months, reviewing sources from the past ten years in several languages. The content should be clear and is referenced to the hilt. But is there anything that seems
128:
In the lead, the paragraphs containing more "pertinent" information, such as the well-known successors and the authors of the project, could be moved above those containing information that might not be as interesting to the reader who is just skimming, like what file types it was supposed to
189:
The 1.0 announcement, an official Sun press release, also talks up its power to compete with MSO. I've also found a zillion contemporary (within a coupla years) documents on openoffice.org about how to migrate, should anyone question Sun's intent further -
76:
216:
69:
132:
The fact that it was supposed to supplant
Microsoft Office could be given greater weight (and maybe even another reference).
62:
50:
199:
195:
184:
180:
166:
162:
150:
111:
107:
44:
17:
135:
The opening sections (History and
Features) nicely describe the important properties of OpenOffice.org.
191:
176:
158:
146:
103:
125:
The lead answers all the questions I would have about it (what is it? who made it? etc.)
210:
142:
122:
As it stands, I like the article a lot and it has a lot of good references.
175:
to compete with MS Office (though it's really obvious it totally did) -
138:
The "Discontinued" section might be summarized a bit more.
70:
8:
98:This peer review discussion has been closed.
91:This peer review discussion has been closed.
171:And I'm now looking for more sources on an
77:
63:
32:
35:
7:
157:separate articles in the section -
24:
185:18:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
167:10:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
151:01:56, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
112:10:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
1:
102:missing to a fresh reader? -
200:11:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
233:
217:October 2013 peer reviews
18:Knowledge:Peer review
117:Comments by APerson
87:
86:
224:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
232:
231:
227:
226:
225:
223:
222:
221:
207:
206:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
230:
228:
220:
219:
209:
208:
205:
204:
203:
202:
169:
140:
139:
136:
133:
130:
126:
123:
100:
95:
94:
93:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
28:OpenOffice.org
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
229:
218:
215:
214:
212:
201:
197:
193:
188:
187:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
168:
164:
160:
155:
154:
153:
152:
148:
144:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
121:
120:
119:
118:
114:
113:
109:
105:
99:
92:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
26:
19:
192:David Gerard
177:David Gerard
172:
159:David Gerard
141:
116:
115:
104:David Gerard
97:
96:
90:
27:
173:intention
211:Category
143:APerson
36:Toolbox
147:talk!
129:read.
16:<
196:talk
181:talk
163:talk
108:talk
213::
198:)
183:)
165:)
149:)
110:)
194:(
179:(
161:(
145:(
106:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.