Has anyone else noticed the severe lack of content concerning LB on the many Wikipedia language sites? As it stands now, there is only one non-English article about LB (Spanish) and it is a "stub." I think international interest in LB would pick up greatly with a presence on Wikipedia besides English.

What do you think?

Well Brent,

Liberty BASIC is mentioned in the Dutch Wiki too.
I only couldn't mention that in the English Wiki.
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Basic

I plan to change the BASIC page, so to mention the birth of language4s like LB and other Window BASIC after W95 too.

Gordon

Hello Gordon,

Thank you for reminding me about your work on WP. I think you have mentioned it before on other forums.

But I may be absolved by the fact that the articles I referenced lack a link to the Dutch site in their "in other languages" lists. I don't know how these get added; quite possibly each site must be edited. I think this needs a look-see.

Hello Brent,

If Stephan is a member of this forum, could you please PM him with a request to help?
Stephan speaks German (English and French too) fluently.
German (or some kind of German) is spoken in Europe by more then 100 million (a 1 with 8 zero's) people.

There is an active forum in France. I guess LB will get in WE there soon, because Just BASIC is there already.

Gordon.

Gordon, Do you mean Stefan Pendl? I don't see his name in the memberlist. I'll probably PM him on Conforums.

BTW, there's also a Danish WP article for JB (http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_BASIC), but nothing for LB.

Brent,

That's who I meant. I remember that he lives in Austria and they speak German there at least.

I changed the Dutch WE-Basic page. It mentions Liberty BASIC now.
But is this correct.

QUOTE

Code:

Carl Gundel wrote Liberty BASIC in 1992 reacting on QBASIC not being expanded to work with Windows.

Gordon.

So, should I mention that LB was a shareware type of Visual Basic that created it own niche nowadays? The WE site says that QBASIC was bundled with MS-DOS this means it was free if you bought MS-DOS.

I think Carl now likes to promote (easy) programming in the first place.

Gordon

Calling LB a shareware version of VB would not be correct. They are very different languages. VB 1.0 for DOS added many commands to QB and removed a few. VB for Windows eliminated or substantially changed a large set of commands. And VB.NET has gone even further afield, becoming something that BASIC programmers of the 1980s would not recognize as BASIC.

Okay, this is my lack of feeling in English.
Maybe I should say: LB is a VB look alike shareware?

I stated LB is a type of VB, but I didn't mean a shareware version of.

How should I phrase this?

Gordon.

Gordon, if it were me, I would not mention VB at all with respect to LB unless it is necessary to make a point.

I think the reason why there is very few translated stuff on Wikipedia is because Liberty BASIC is not localized!

Proof that Carl wanted a low-cost QBASIC-like system for Windows: http://world.std.com/~carlg/lbhistory.html

Quote:

The other reason was because I was disappointed that software for Windows was so expensive (typically $500 or more in 1991), and there was no Windows version of Microsoft QBASIC.

I know this topic is old but i just saw it and had the NEED FOR SPEED :D

You now have a SERBIAN wikipedia entry http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_BASIC

That's good to know! I found a list of the number of articles on each language of WP and saw that sr is like #28. Maybe this fact will be a "call to action" for the other 25 above you.

You might have noticed that the article is a stub, i wrote a bigger article but for some reason it was shortened (i never wrote a new article so probably there was some mistakes)