Difference between revisions of "Talk:LibreOffice"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(artwiz-fonts: new section)
(artwiz-fonts: re)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
Are artwiz-fonts necessary? I have not them installed but LO is still looking good.
 
Are artwiz-fonts necessary? I have not them installed but LO is still looking good.
 +
:(please sign your edits in talk pages with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>)
 +
:I don't have artwiz-fonts installed either and my LO looks fine too.
 +
:This is the history of that paragraph: [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=OpenOffice.org&diff=next&oldid=66734], [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=OpenOffice.org&diff=prev&oldid=74767], [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=OpenOffice.org&diff=prev&oldid=123725], [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=LibreOffice&diff=169379&oldid=169371].
 +
:{{Pkg|artwiz-fonts}} was added on the [[OpenOffice.org]] article 4 years ago by [[User:Kholddagger]], and that's been his only edit ever to an article in the Main namespace.
 +
:I suggest removing the reference to artwiz-fonts, and would even consider removing the whole note about fonts.
 +
:-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 09:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:42, 8 May 2013

artwiz-fonts

Are artwiz-fonts necessary? I have not them installed but LO is still looking good.

(please sign your edits in talk pages with ~~~~)
I don't have artwiz-fonts installed either and my LO looks fine too.
This is the history of that paragraph: [1], [2], [3], [4].
artwiz-fonts was added on the OpenOffice.org article 4 years ago by User:Kholddagger, and that's been his only edit ever to an article in the Main namespace.
I suggest removing the reference to artwiz-fonts, and would even consider removing the whole note about fonts.
-- Kynikos (talk) 09:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)