Wikipedia:Peer review/Back Orifice 2000/archive1

Back Orifice 2000

Is there still something missing from the article? --Easyas12c 22:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about a clearly marked link to the documentation, early on (not in "external links") in a paragraph about how to install, and another paragraph about how to operate? --James S. 10:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Would that not be a thing for Wikibooks or the Bo2k team to do? --Easyas12c 18:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a short article is perfectly fine, but I think it would benefits a lot from expansion:
- The box says "trojan horse", and I remember some criticism for this reason; something about it may be added
  - I don't understand the mention actually at all because bo2k can be the army placed inside a Trojan horse, but it definitely has nothing to do with the horse. --Easyas12c 18:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no detail about how the system works: is the network protocol the same as BackOffice? Does the computer to be controlled need any special setting or installed software?
  - Thanks. This will make a good addition. Such things might be missing without us notifying because we splitted from back orifice article lately. --Easyas12c 18:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Differences with the other system in the box at the end of the article?
  - Should this be a separate comparison article? --Easyas12c 18:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The last sentence of the lead says "As of 2005, there is still an active development community of BO2k."; the word "still" gives the idea that developing it is active but not so much as it used to be; if this is true, it is worth mentioning.
  - I'll remove still for now. It is hard to estimate the efficiency of a development team from outside. --Easyas12c 18:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Liberatore(T) 14:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for the trojan horse, my point is that, as mentioned in the Back Orifice article, some people have related this program with trojan horses. It may be good to 1. say that some people believe that, 2. tell the reader that BO is not a trojan horse by itself but can be used for that, and 3. other programs can be used for that. However, since this is already said in BO article, this one may just contain a mention and a reference to the other article.

As for the comparison, that depends on how much these systems differ (which I have no idea about, personally). As a start, the features of BO2k that are not present or underdeveloped or uncommon in other system may be mentioned here. - Liberatore(T) 10:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]