Foobar2000 Talk:Foobar2000

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Foobar2000 article.

Please do not use it as a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Use the forums instead. Please read the wiki policy before editing. Sign and date your posts using two dashes and four tildes (--~~~~). Place new comments after existing ones (but within topic sections). Separate topic sections with a ==Descriptive header==. Feel free to use these smilies by embedding their codes: {{smiley|)}} {{smiley|D}} {{smiley|(}} {{smiley|;}} New to Hydrogenaudio Wiki? Welcome! You may want to read our wiki policy and frequently asked questions.

Previous talk

<<snip>> Removed long dead conversations from 2005 Use history to view --Reglib 21:23, 19 May 2006 (CDT)

---

You do realize that somebody responsible for hydrogenaudio is blocking entire ISP's IP-address ranges? It makes your software (foobar2000) look kind of raunchy at best. I stopped looking further right there, when I was pointed to your forum on "hydrogenaudio.org" it said that I could not view that. Apparently this wiki is not blocking the IP-ranges, but that's besides the point. What I also dislike about the foobar2000 'official' page, is that it is way too anonymous and scary. WHO created it? Is it a human being, a company? Is there a contact or about page anywhere to look at? If it is on that hydrogen domain, we can't see it. Just so you know. I wouldn't put my info in their hands for a second if I were you. Kjhgkjg 18:10, 3 February 2006 (CST)

---

I'm thinking about reorganizing this page to be friendier for people looking to learn more about Foobar2000 while maintaining it as quick reference for veterans.

• Pretty colors, probably using tables, to further delineate sections
• Using keywords people are more used to such as: download, screenshots, support
• Pictures that don't mean anything but look pretty

I hope you all like pink and unicorns! j/k

--Reglib 21:23, 19 May 2006 (CDT)

I see no unicorns... I :wub: unicorns :-D

--pepoluan 23:01, 23 August 2006 (CDT)

Page reorganization

I added a talkpage header template to the wiki, borrowed from wikipedia ;) Now I'll be reorganizing the frontpage to look more like a software wikipedia page. I believe we do not need to reinvent the wheel. Beto 14:57, 22 August 2006 (CDT)

I also added an infobox software template to the wiki and used it in the foobar page. If you want to discuss anything please post it here. --Beto 20:34, 23 August 2006 (CDT)

The infobox collides with the heading's underline... can you put in some kid of margin-left around the box? --pepoluan 23:01, 23 August 2006 (CDT)

I tried but it appears not to be doable. It happens with the wikipedia template as well... --Beto 09:22, 24 August 2006 (CDT)

Beto, I found out how to do it. Do check the infobox software template. An explanation is in the discussion page. --pepoluan 17:25, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

Great!! Thank you. I already updated other infoboxes I created with your code.--Beto 07:26, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

New page layout!

What do you think? Another idea is I can make a template that puts the foobar2000 logo in the right corner, linking to the main foobar page (there's ones like these on wikipedia). This'd be useful for users and... stuff. ~Elliottmobile (talk | contribs) 10:44, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

I really like this layout . I am not really sure about the second column though.... By the way, are you using an external editor to edit the pages? The built in wiki editor is featureless IMO....--Beto 12:17, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Second column was just to keep the table of contents to the right, really ;). I suppose it's useless... and nope, too many years of coding HTML in notepad does this to you :P ~Elliottmobile (talk | contribs) 12:40, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Replay Gain guide leading to false information

The replay guide at: http://www.bobulous.org.uk/misc/Replay-Gain.html is ok, comparing replay gain in winamp & foobar, but the article on lossy codecs is full of false information: http://www.bobulous.org.uk/misc/lossy_audio_2006.html It compares the average bitrate of wma, vorbis, mp3!!!!! There isn't even a comment section to tell the author how wrong he is...