Are there any sites where you can download free add-ons?
- Yes --- vBulletin.org and vBwebmaster.com
- Just remember you need a valid version of vB, which is validated before you get access to these mods. Havok 28 June 2005 07:41 (UTC)
Someone keeps removing the link to www.vBwebmaster.com --- why?
Article
It's good to have an article on vBulletin, but it's missing quite a bit; the history of its creation is an interesting story. The article has a few biased aspects.
"AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript and XML) integration for easy moderation."
- I don't see the problem with this line, it's there to inform what AJAX is used for, in this case moderation, and to make it easier for the user. Havok 16:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
"For full list of features" link to vB site shouldn't be in the article body.
- Again, I don't see the problem. Would it be better if we created an sub article for a list of features? Havok 16:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Is the pricing really necessary? It makes the article look like an ad. Maybe just mention the fact that there's two different license types.
- I'm going to rewrite this line to be more fact and less ad. Havok 16:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
It's also weritten in the second person, when it shuld be in the third.
- I'll start rewriting the text so that it follows the third person Havok 16:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
vBulletin 3.5 has ben released today, updated the article to that effect.
Is it really necessary to have anything besides the developer staff list--if even that? It doesn't really serve a purpose because most users will not know (or care) who those people are, unless they are part of the vB.com/vB.org community. Rob.daemon 09:06, 6 Nov. 2005 (US/Pacific)
BBcode
I made this Borgs8472 22:41, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how adding custom tags falls within the scope of this article. Or, at the least, this section could definitely be cleaned up a bit. Bit Haze 22:45, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- This section would probably be more at home in the Wikipedia: name space. Additionally it seems to me that [wikipedia] would be more appropiate than [wiki]. Frank Quist 15:56, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- ^ ^ do you use bbcodes? The shorter the better Borgs8472 00:33, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Tweaking
"Neutralizing" some of the article language as time permits. I run a vBulletin 3.5-based board and love the software, but this article should avoid superlatives and anything resembling marketing-speak.
Shouldn't there be more information? I know, add it myself ...
Dates of version upgrades and new features added with each upgrade. Origins and history of vBulletin (the UBB roots). Impex. Sctipt, CMS and MediaWiki integration.
Again, this shouldn't be an ad! vBulletin is one of amny excellent message board systems out there.
Add a Wikipedia BBCode code link to your vBulletin forum
- AdminCP -> Custom BB Codes -> Add New BB Code:
- Title: Wikipedia
- Tag: wiki
- Replacement: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{param}]{param}[/url]
- Example: [wiki]VBulletin[/wiki]
- Description: Wrap the [ wiki ] bbcode around key words in a discussion to allow readers to find out more about a particular topic or word without separate search being required by the poster.
- Use {option}: No
- Button Image: Not designed
This was originally in the article; I've removed it because we're supposed to avoid self-references, and also because it's poorly formatted. æle ✆ 01:55, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
- Nothing poorly formatted about it :p Borgs8472 00:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
External Links
The external links section has become quite the hot-spot for changes. People continually add and remove their site's links and it's rather annoying because there is no hard-and-fast rule for what can and what can and cannot go in that section. I think that the rule should be this: only officially Jelsoft-recognized sites should be placed there. That limits it to: www.vbulletin.com, www.vbulletin.org, www.vbulletin-germany.com, and www.vbulletin-chinese.com.
The two foreign-language ones are recognized here. And www.vbulletin.org is recognized here (see the "vBulletin Customization @ vBulletin.org).
That's how I think it should be implemented: only if there is a link on the official vB site should a link be placed in this section. Comments? Rob.daemon 20:59, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- I agree unless someone can make a very strong argument why their site is essential further reading. This is one of WP's most spammed pages, it seems. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 21:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- www.vbwebmaster.com is the only forum dedicated to vbulletin administrators. There is no such forum that is jelsoft recognized. This is an important resource for vBulletin owners and those considering owning a vBulletin. It is also a non commercial site. But I agree there shouldnt be 2 dozen sites listed that sell skins and hacks and graphics - Joeychgo
- That may be true, but you're not a neutral source. I went to the site and your an administrator. And I'm a vB owner and a community regular, but I've never heard of this site until the Wiki article. Rob.daemon 22:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- Netural source or not doesnt change what I said. Its a non commercial site thats dedicated to only VB owners and prospective owners.
- Its not a link I posted to promote the site. - Leave the link alone.
It says clearly that only links to official vB sites should be posted, and if you posted it with the argument "www.vbwebmaster.com is the only forum dedicated to vbulletin administrators. There is no such forum that is jelsoft recognized. This is an important resource for vBulletin owners and those considering owning a vBulletin." it is to promote your site. Do not re-add it please. Havok (T/C) 21:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
- only links to official vB sites should be posted was added long after a link to vBwebmaster was placed. Do not RE-Remove it please.
- That's now being re-evaluated as things on Wikipedia are. And regardless of what it said before, it appears that the consensus now is that it should be official links only. Also, sign your comments (use the ~~~~ macro)! Rob.daemon 05:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I've added the offical vBulletin Germany site for vBulletin modifications (www.vbhacks-germany.com/forum/index.php). See the vBulletin.org forums for more information (vBulletin.org). Near the bottom of the forum list you'll find a link to the site ("vBHacks-Germany.com, Official Support Site for Hacked German vBulletin Boards") 216.215.128.255
- Thanks, I didn't know that the site existed. And thanks for providing a reference. Rob.daemon 07:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- No problem, I figured you'd just remove it if I didn't provide a refernce ;) 216.215.128.130
Reinstating {{cleanup}}
This article is still very incoherent past the first sentence, and some of it reads like ad copy. I'm putting the cleanup tag back on until we can decide on a good cleaned-up version. æle ✆ 23:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- I found some time today to rewrite this article completely. I removed the entire bit about pricing, options, and all that stuff--it's like an advertisement. I removed the section about vBulletin.org because this is about software, not vBulletin and its surrounding aura. I changed the section on versions to be a more of "what has changed" list as opposed to a feature list. I cover vBulletin 2 and vBulletin 1 and vB Lite. I also added a history block. I revised it quite a bit in my sandbox to make it sound as NPOV-free as possible. Comments/changes welcome as long as they improve :). Rob.daemon 23:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the ownership comment from the article text regarding external links. Wikipedia does not endorse only "official" links for anything (or, at least, it shouldn't). Obvious spam should be removed, but care should be taken to not disallow links that may be useful to readers or which aren't an attempt at spam. —Locke Cole • t • c 12:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but I fail to see how this has anything to do with article ownership. Nobody's claiming that they own the article. æle ✆ 22:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- Only "official" vBulletin links? You don't see how that makes it look like the article is owned by the creators of vBulletin? And in any event, there's also neutral point of view concerns to only allowing "official" links. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)