Talk:Animation:Master

Que's Changes

Just added a few points, feel free to change them back.

NPOV

No way this article is neutral. It's more like an atvertisement converted to a wikipedia article.

edit: I've reverted the article to a few edits in the past. The article is much shorter now, but pretty much neutral. Cristan 20:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed edits by 83.70.34.89

As a user of the software, I'm sympathetic to what the unregistered user was trying to do, but the mention of a project "currently" in operation by the company for its userbase has a certain timeliness that is inappropriate for an encyclopedic reference. Additional links added were also removed, as they can be accessed by navigating through the main site already listed. MDonfield 01:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Other software articles are allowed to run at length on the projects they are used for. What is the basis for the notion that it is "inappropriate". Why is this article being allowed be the target of someone's petty grievances?

The accurate information that was here before should be restored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.152.115.214 (talk) 17:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Developer Name

So what's up with the Dr. Mr. Esq. thing? Using all those titles is a little advert-like, and pretty presumptuous if you ask me Inigo07 (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

So you've met Martin, then? :) JeffJonez (talk) 18:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Nope. But as 3D animation is my profession, I've talked with colleagues about this program. It's supposed to be a joke and the sales hype from Hash is supposed to be ridiculous. Inigo07 (talk) 17:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

A joke, I'll agree with. My school's 3D Animation courses use it, and I dropped a second quarter because the software was so horrible. I'll bet it was that sales hype that got the course provider to use the program in their educational materials. I personally don't think A:M is worth the $200 price tag. I'm probably violating TPGs here, aren't I? :) Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 07:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Ranting aside, I've found sources that indicate Mr. Hash is both a PhD and a Lawyer, but I've conceded that these honorifics aren't relevant. And yes, ranting about the quality of the software on it's talk page is off track. :) JeffJonez (talk) 04:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

biased editing decisions

I've noticed that other 3D app articles are allowed to run to extended length even though they have no more to reasonably cover in an encyclopedia article, but the Animation:Master article keeps getting chopped down to a few lines. The software is not a "joke", it is highly powerful and functional, regardless of the experience of some kid in a high school class who couldn't figure it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.152.114.156 (talk) 06:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Animation:Master. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070806012657/http://mag.awn.com:80/index.php?ltype=pageone&article_no=1586 to http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=pageone&article_no=1586

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)