Talk:MAMP

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 October 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

Define scope more clearly[edit]

MAMP can be used as a generic description for a stack running on MacOS, or it can be used (apparently, according to this article) as a proprietary name of a product originally designed to run on MacOS but later also ported to Windows OS.
As yet this article seems to mention only the proprietary use, which seems not ideal to me. —DIV (194.193.146.160 (talk) 00:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

This confusion seems to have been introduced in October 2017 by IP address 31.202.25.100. As a result, a legitimate article on MAMP (AMP on a Mac) has morphed into an advert for a proprietary software stack that is also (confusingly) available on Windows. This is amplified by the fact that an account with only one edit updated this article in September 2018 to add additional marketing information.

I don't have time right now, but I am going to review this article and will likely roll it back to the last version that was only about the combination of independent pieces of software, rather than about a proprietary product that is only loosely related to the actual meaning of MAMP by stealing the generic acronym.

--Craig (t|c) 23:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed this. You can read my edit summary for more details. It is now back to being an article about the generic term, instead of being an advert for a proprietary product. --Craig (t|c) 07:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]