Pdf expert vs notability free.Wikipedia:Article titles
Looking for:
The best PDF app for Managing, Reading, and Editing — The Sweet Setup - Digital Business Planner |
Pdf expert vs notability free
Alexandermcnabb had a great idea above. Is a good number of days to bump it up to? I think that extending the 90 days is beyond logical Yes, I realise that now. All the fun of the fair, just as I predicted. The Phab request has now been marked as 'stalled'. I hope enough people are following this because the devs are going to need a lot of convincing this is necessary. There was some pretty strong support for that here.
Chris troutman , Extraordinary Writ , MarioGom , Atsme , Barkeep49 , Rsjaffe , Kudpung , North , Alexandermcnabb , and Scottywong : Pinging other participants in the discussion, please state your preference as to the time period. The hangup really is about indefinite, which is favored philosophically by most NPPers to ensure nothing is externally visible by without review. Since there is little to no opposition to extending from 90 days, I just asked at the phab to implement days at least as an interim step.
I think we should take that for now if we can get it to give some immediate relief. Howdy folks. I was recently asked to be the NPP technical issues coordinator and I happily accepted. MB and I are going through the old PageTriage bug reports and feature requests. PageTriage is the software that pops up the NPP toolbar on the right of your screen. There's a ton of old bug reports and feature requests, and some are outdated. Anyway, are there any bug reports and feature requests that jump to mind that you think we should prioritize?
Feel free to name one or two issues that are important to you, to get them on our radar. My own experience is having AFD on it malfunction many times. Usually the AFD page not getting created, or getting created without the contents. I started to try to ask about it here and the experts just said use Twinkle.
Let me know if you want me to list those. My focus is more on automation, and lessening the work load for patrollers, and what they have to do after landing on a new article. I may return to expand my list if anything more comes to mind. Hi folks - I'm a statistician and fellow NPP member and I'm curious to learn more about how we are tracking the size of the backlog.
In particular I'd like to research the volume of articles flowing into and out of the backlog each day in hopes of coming up with an estimate of what it would take to permanently reduce the size of the backlog and keep it hovering as close as possible to zero.
Yes this may sound crazy but I think it's a good exercise at the very least if nobody has done it yet. In reality, the rate of reviews changes in response to the backlog and other things To keep the backlog low, we need happy reviewers who stick around and respond as needed.
Right now the reviewing process is painful for most people and they just grin and bear it and many just pitch in when the barn is on fire. Perhaps a copyvio prevention tool would work similar to the way the blacklist tool works; i. I'd appreciate your thoughts before I add this to our wishlist. I wonder if she's thinking EranBot , which is a tool that DanCherek brought to my attention in this comment?
As of approximately July 20, Yahoo the service currently used by CSBot and a number of other copyright assessment bots no longer allows searching by automated processes via a free web interface.
Discussion is now ongoing to find a replacement search engine, but until those conclude the bot is not functional and no longer processes requests. More details can be found on the maintainer's talk page. Besides the normal reasons, I took this one there requesting substantial discussions which could provide useful guidance.
Closed by a highly experienced admin. The result was delete. This idea was inspired in part by several discussions here in New Page Patrol, but also on the village pumps, ANI, and the current ArbCom case about conduct in deletion discussions.
Please take a look. Does this look like something you as patrollers would use? Would you be inclined to use it instead of draftification?
Instead of PROD? Instead of AFD? In conjunction with one or more of those? Do you think it would be workable, an improvement over what we have?
Or would it be a mess? Would it get sufficient participation? Would you feel obligated to use it? Would you be confused as to when it is appropriate? Right now it's a very rough idea, and any feedback is welcome. One of the reviewers User:Bruxton has moved an article I was working on to draft space giving the reason as "I unable verify any of the references. I logged in to work on the article and saw it was moved again even after I did everything the previous reviewers asked for added at least 2 citations - I added 4, with inline references to a 5th study I haven't been able to find yet.
The books are not all available in a publicly accessible way, is it then not allowed to use them in the article? I have read the information that was given me and I think the article is ready but it was moved again.
IMO the article complies with wp:not and wp:notability and that is sufficient to exist in mainspace. The inability to verify the given references is not a valid reason to say otherwise. That said, the article in such terrible shape that it really isn't an article.
Besides the "no lead" issue, the whole article is written like somebody just making some comments rather than presenting the topic.
In short, the article does not cover the topic. It's not mandatory by any means, but I'd also consider online versions of those sources - they DO exist. There are links to Kieckhefer's work here, for instance!
No harm working on it in draftspace, as per my colleagues above. Hello all. These bugs have been around for years and are probably the most common bugs that cause people to get fed up with the toolbar and switch to Twinkle. I would encourage folks to try switching back to the Page Curation toolbar for deletion tagging, and let me know if the below bugs are gone, and let me know if I need to fix any additional bugs.
I have a patch in code review to hopefully fix the AFD bug mentioned above. New question. Has anybody had problems of any kind with tagging proposed deletion PROD since my patch last Thursday? If not I will close the ticket on Phabricator. As a reminder, the problem before was "empty reason". If someone would like to comment on the notability of List of retracted paleontology papers that'd be welcome.
My current take would be that this ought to be draftified until at least two sources showing general topic notability are provided. When I first created this template, I added it to the top of all the NPP sub-pages above the navigation tabs.
I could see it at a quick glance at any page I went to. It was moved without any discussion, because someone felt it "looked ugly" there according to a edit summary. Now it is different places - before the toc, after the toc, in the graph, in a text block. This really bugs me because I have to hunt for it instead of it just being on top on all pages. Does anyone object if I move it back? The template just displays the backlog count in black text.
The Pending Changes counter also displays a color-coded "level":. Originally, I didn't think this would be useful for NPP. At Pending Changes, very high is over 18 and a few people can review the changes and get it back low relatively quickly - the level typically varies throughout the day; the colors probably do call attention to the backlog and cause some people to review PCs.
If we implemented this here, the boundaries would need to be several thousand and it wouldn't work the same way. Now, I think it might help. After the May newsletter, the backlog dropped about 1, then flattened out. After the June newsletter, there was another 1, reduction and then flat. Then the July backlog drive led to a reduction of 4, in the first half of the month, and then it's been mostly flat again. This shows that just keeping the backlog in people's minds has an affect.
Using these thresholds would be another way to do that. Some people might see we are rising and be motivated to do more reviews to keep from crossing into a higher category. It would be a permanent goal. It may help, probably not much, but we need every little bit we can get in any way. I can't think of any real negative - it's just a line of text wherever people have put the template. We could try this:. In spite of all the effort the past few months, with this scheme we would still be "very high", but getting down to "high" is not too far off.
I'm guessing that my situation may exist for some others. For most areas where I work in Wikipedia I both enjoy it and know that it is for a good cause.
Pdf expert vs notability free
Reset Password mail sent, please check your inbox for further processing. Would you like to reset your password? Please enter an email address and we will send you a reset link. Thanks for the download. Please check your email for the link. Remove All. PDF Expert. Read More. Notability Note Taking Software. Files Folders. Ivy Documents. Online Check Writer.
Microsoft OneNote. Zoho Notebook. Google Keep. Compare now 0 Remove All. Company Name. Subscribe me to SaaS Weekly Roundup. No Spam! No Unwanted Emails! Just one value packed email every week.
Access Monitoring. Pricing Model. View 3 screenshot s. View 0 screenshot s. Google Drive. Overall, the reading experience is solid, offering one of the fastest renderings of large PDF files we tested.
In other words, no matter what your office uses, you can probably sync your documents in the app. Readdle has also created a secure and fast way to transfer PDFs from your iPad to your Mac and vice versa when both devices are connected to the same local network.
Enter the code into the site on your Mac and watch as your Mac and iPad instantly connect to one another. Opening PDFs on the Mac is lightning quick and can be viewed right in the browser, or can be downloaded locally to your Mac. The app also allows you to enable iOS Data Protection file-encryption system. These are great options that help keep access to your cloud storage secure but easily accessible to you. Foxit has stormed onto the iPad in recent memory after hitting its stride on Windows.
Foxit has great design taste, a strong set of tools in its free tier, and a reasonable annual subscription for editing, organizing, and filling and signing forms. Commenting tools — which oddly includes highlighting, underlining, comment boxes, and more — are diverse and customizable. Second, signatures are super finicky in Foxit as of the time of writing. You can create and save multiple signatures, however placing and resizing and reshaping signatures is super frustrating.
This could be a bug, or even something related to the iPadOS 15 public beta. But if signatures are fundamental to your PDF work, this may give you pause.
Apple Pencil support is present and totally workable, however some interesting UX choices here have it feeling awkward. The Pencil performs dual usage based on how long you tap. PDF Expert handles this by making all finger-based gestures navigational and all Apple Pencil taps and gestures as annotations.
Fillable PDFs work well inside Foxit. All fillable fields are highlighted in blue, just like they are in PDF Expert. Filling in fields is quick and you can use the included bar above the keyboard to jump between fields with ease. Searching an OCRed PDF is a breeze inside Foxit, as search results show up in a sidebar after you perform your search query and you can tap between the results in the sidebar. Search was fast, efficient, and spot on, every time.
Tapping on any text box on a PDF provides you an editing box which closely matches the font as you change the content in the PDF. Tapping on the four box grid button in the top right brings you to a thumbnail view where you can move pages around and reorganize the PDF. It took us about 15 minutes of tapping around to discover if the feature existed.
PDF Expert simply provides more tools for free and has better stability and performance across the app. This helps PDFpen feel much more native to the iPad than other options we tested. There is a standard set of items like those found in other apps: comments, text, arrows, boxes, lines, and camera roll. There is also a massive set of proofing markup icons for proofreading documents and there are a range of great stamps for processing documentation for office workflows. As noted above, the list of PDF apps we tested for this review was extensive.
Here is a quick summary of our findings for each app. However, where iAnnotate 4 falls short is in design and organization. The app has extra small touch targets scattered throughout, specifically in the right tool sidebar. At best, the app is a PDF reader right now, with an exorbitantly expensive subscription that hides the ability to merge PDFs.
Acrobat does have Liquid Mode though, which is great for reading and jumping around a PDF when researching. On the left side, you can see an outline of the document and you can scroll through the document with your thumb.
Liquid Mode highlights exactly what Acrobat is good for: reading and previewing, but nothing more. GoodReader has strong Apple Pencil support, with some of the best handwriting features of any app tested here.
The Apple Pencil sensitivity is a little on the sensitive side and there are numerous extra taps to delete, undo, or change an Apple Pencil annotation. All Books features are baked right into the share sheet, making importing into Books a breeze. Where Books falls short is, among other things, its markup tools.
PDF Pro 4 has a lot going for it once you get past the measly one-day free trial. If you do opt to pay for PDF Pro 4 though, the app has some solid features. The app can merge files nearly instantly — faster than nearly all other apps tested.
There are good annotation tools for quick markup and you can fill PDFs right within the app however, our testing yielded some heavy bugs in fillable PDFs, mainly in invisible text.
Most PDF apps on the iPad use a top header bar to navigate and choose tools. However, PDF Hero opts for a left sidebar for housing tools, which is a great workflow for right-handed writers with the Apple Pencil.
The app is also easy to navigate and understand thanks to its reliance on text-based buttons rather than glyphs. There are still other PDF apps for the iPad that have very specific use-cases. Highlights does one thing very, very well: showcase your PDF highlights. As you highlight and underline items in the PDF, Highlights takes those highlights and creates a split-screen view showcasing all the most important bits of information in the PDF.
Overall, Highlights is likely best used by researchers or students who find themselves scouring through PDFs as they build a thesis or dissertation. LiquidText is another researcher-specific PDF app which provides you a very unique two-paned view for taking blurbs out of a PDF, taking notes on that specific blurb, and synthesizing your notes to other notes in other PDFs. High level active reading often requires the need to jump from page to page or document to document to find connections.
LiquidText is built on folks who need to jump between sections of information quickly and to ensure maximum effectiveness for connection-making. Of course, LiquidText is very research-specific and best used in the hands of a knowledge worker. For specific research needs, LiquidText is one of the best options available on the App Store. For more general needs, most users should stick to PDF Expert.
We here at The Sweet Setup love Goodnotes. We have an entire course on the app and one of our most popular products each year is designed for and best used inside Goodnotes.
For handwritten notes on the iPad, Goodnotes is one of the best options available. Those PDFs can be annotated, highlighted, underlined, and more right within the app so your notes are all housed in one spot. The editing features alone are killer, if you choose to unlock them.
Comments
Post a Comment