The foobar2000 section of the knowledge base has fallen into a little bit of disrepair as of late.

Specifically a lot of changes have been made to the software since the 0.9.5 release, and the wiki hasn't been kept up to date, not to mention there are a lot of articles that need to be created (like documenting the Properties window).

I've taken it upon myself to address these issues during this month, however, since it's a community project, I figured I'd see if there was anyone else wanting to be involved.


If there is anyone wishing to help make significant contributions, I'll go through the trouble of creating a taskforce and marking offending pages with with templates so that we can all work together.

If not, I can save some time and skip doing all that.

Anyways, if you'd like to help out, just let me know in this thread.

I'm in. I think the guides need to be updated, and I'm also in favor of discarding outdated information (0.8.3 specific guides/FAQ for instance).

I've created the taskforce.

Thanks for taking the time to create that. It will definitely go a long way in making this a concerted/organized effort.

Three quick questions:
1. Task-force related discussions: Should they be posted here or in the "Discussion" of the taskforce wiki page?

2. You mention removing "out-of-date" information. I find this to be ambiguous:
a. Do you mean information that no longer holds (hypothetical example "DUI doesn't support columns")
b. Do you mean information that is no longer "relevant" (guides pertaining to 0.8.3, CUI codes with "?0000FF?|?00FFFF?" for color instead of $rgb())?
c. Do you mean both of the above?

Like I said earlier, I'm in favor of removing 0.8.3 era guides, and other "guides" that are no longer relevant. I feel that people still using 0.8.3 are well acquainted with the program and wouldn't miss the guide(s). Removing the guides would also obviate the need to have "0.8.3 only" type indicators next to guides, tips, and questions.

3. Do you think creating a guide should be one of the aims? I think at the very least we should create a list of reading for "beginner", "intermediate" and "advanced" users to atleast point them in the right direction. (For beginner, we might point to articles such as "how to install components", for intermediate users, we might have "how to add custom encoders" etc).

Finally, we should work towards creating templates for the various pages (3rd party components, FAQs etc) so that the wiki looks more consistent.

I'd be happy to help

Rest asured, they won't. But it amazes me how lightly wiki users and moderators tend to delete stuff. One thing is automated spam, or foul language. But legitimate articles once took considerable time to create and deserve better fate, such as an archive directory.

I'm sure we will outgrow this thread quickly enough. but if there are some more volunteers, we can use this as an "I'm in" thread. But allow me to answer your quick questions up front, here.

I'm certainly not about to delete anything, and I'm not sure where you got that notion.
On the task force page I've said:
Personally, I think it would be best to just move 0.8.x stuff off the front page onto it's own dedicated page (call it an archive if you wish) that we can link to on the bottom of foobar2000:foobar2000.
As for out of date information on pages we wish to maintain as current, I'm sure that is best handled on a case by case basis.
But for clarity's sake, I certainly don't think it makes sense to have out of date and current info in the same article.

Or we could just move those pages somewhere out of the way. We could even flag them with some sort of "archive template" if need be.

I don't like dividing a "guide" up into "skill levels" like it is currently, especially when there are more naturally divisible ways to approach things. Who's to say someone who considers themselves a "basic user" doesn't want to use an external encoder? Who are we to define how they use the program? How does a link called "basic user" help someone who is looking for specific information find that information?

To me, the much more objective way to cover the functionality of the official foobar2000 package is by the individual components and dialogs. If anything, an overarching "guide" should be more like an FAQ which expands past the realm of the official FAQ to include some commonly used third party components. However, for me personally, good documentation of first-party functionality receives priority.

Certainly.

[edit]Replies to this post should probably go in the discussion page of the taskforce. From there we can work out our goals.