[Help] B4X Wikipedia page

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
This is not about B4X forum but an external page.

I have referenced a link to a Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B4X) in my Youtube video


Today I checked the page it seems it is no longer available.

The only article on Wikipedia is on Basic4ppc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic4ppc) which is outdated and not really describe about what B4X is.

I suggest the editor of the B4X Wikipedia page or some volunteers can rewrite the page to help B4X gaining better SEO and let AIs crawl on this programming language.
 
Last edited:

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
Erel said:
There was a wiki in the past and it failed.
Click to expand...

I still believe at least there is a page with basic information as it used to be. Especially in English.
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
My understanding is due to lack of updates.
 

epiCode

Active Member
Licensed User
peacemaker said:
What is the reason ? I could not understand
Click to expand...
It says:
"Not seeing any significant coverage of this Android IDE. The article itself is sourced entirely to a forum dedicated to the product (b4x.com) hosted by the product's developers (Anywhere Software). Any other sources to be found are just online tutorials, etc."

Seems it came across to mods as product promotion, however, google will still direct anyone to b4x.com instead of a wiki page.
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
We have lack of people to write more articles about B4X.
Maybe lack of marketing (paid)
Lack of news coverage
As we already discussed previously.
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
We can still find Basic4ppc page

Basic4ppc - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
which is redirected from B4x.
This is "wrong". It should be the other way round.
My point is B4X wikipedia page should not be removed.
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/B4X&oldid=1257149837#B4X

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Click to expand...



There are lack of external blogs or articles talking about B4X. The 2 articles mentioned above are very outdated.
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
  • Comment: None of the cited references are WP:SIRS. At least three must be. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:11, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it failed the review due to the sources are unreliable according to the reviewer or I am a new editor in his eyes. I am not sure.
Anyone can help to continue editing the page, putting more "reliable" sources?
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
I edited the draft again with some links.
If it is being rejected gain, I will give up.
 

aeric

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
The page is rejected again.
I only write the pros about B4X and suppress the cons thus made it looks like an ads.
I will try to add some cons to make it look unbiased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…