Talk:ExamDiff Pro

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 August, 2005. The result was to keep by default. A merge with ExamDiff was supported by some voters and may be a good idea, but that doesn't require a VfD discussion. An archived record of this vote can be found here.

Edit request: add features from versions 13–17

I am the developer of ExamDiff Pro (disclosed on my user page), so I am requesting this change rather than making it myself.

Please add the following items to the Features section; they were introduced in versions 13–17:

• Syntax highlighting, a code-structure "scope bar", and structure-aware alignment of file versions, based on the Tree-sitter parsing library
• Comparison of Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint documents preserving tables, lists, and comments
• Tree view and fast byte-by-byte content comparison in directory comparison
• Native ARM64 support and a portable edition
• Text rendering using DirectWrite

Source:

I understand this is a primary source; I'll suggest independent coverage as it becomes available. Thank you. Gregnis (talk) 18:05, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

Response: 2026-10-05

Not done for now: This article has been marked as needing secondary sources for ages. You are a significant contributor to it, which per WP:COI is strongly discouraged. I have nominated this article for deletion instead. Packrat3860 (talk) 03:46, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I'm the developer of ExamDiff Pro (COI disclosed on my user page), so I'll leave the outcome to others, but the nomination says no independent coverage exists. Editorial reviews in independent publications:

• Brandt, Andrew (17 September 2009). "ExamDiff Pro Finds The Differences Between Seemingly Similar Files". PCWorld. https://www.pcworld.com/article/525055/examdiff_pro-2.html
• Brandt, Andrew (8 November 2011). "Make Short Work of File Comparisons With ExamDiff Pro". PCWorld. https://www.pcworld.com/article/478081/examdiff_pro.html
• Finn, Betsy (June 2010). "Review: ExamDiff Pro, A Visual Directory and File Comparison Tool". Professional Photographer. http://web.archive.org/web/20150906063202/http://www.ppmag.com/web-exclusives/2010/06/review-examdiff-pro.html

Independent use in published sources (not reviews, but showing real-world use):

• U.S. Government Accountability Office (2008). GAO Briefing to the Task Force: Report on the Findings in the Investigation... (Florida 13th Congressional District election contest), p. 23. GAO used ExamDiff Pro to verify the iVotronic voting-machine firmware against the certified version. https://books.google.com/books?id=kTDqe4BV7toC&pg=PA23
• U.S. House of Representatives (2008). Dismissing the Election Contest Relating to the Office of Representative from the Thirteenth Congressional District of Florida, p. 168. https://books.google.com/books?id=TozgP-3SPDgC&pg=PA168
• Computational Science and Computational Intelligence: 11th International Conference (CSCI), Springer, p. 306. The paper's change metrics were computed with ExamDiff Pro. https://books.google.com/books?id=R7V4EQAAQBAJ&pg=PA306

If the article is kept, I'd welcome an independent editor rebuilding it from these and removing the self-published material. Gregnis (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for following up with sources. I recommend joining the discussion at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ExamDiff_Pro_(2nd_nomination). Packrat3860 (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, done Gregnis (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2026 (UTC)