Talk:OpenText/Archives/2017
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Software Limitations and Criticisms chapters
Those two chapters of this article are not neutral point of view and should be removed (Criticisms by definition). This is supposed to be a encyclopaedic article and weather the criticisms are valid or not they have no place here. --Sindri 00:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
As far as i can tell critiquing technology and ideas was okay given the wording and use of references. Would it be more appropriate to reword and source these criticisms instead of removing them?
see the following articles: java critisms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_%28programming_language%29#Criticism
here is a whole article on criticisms of java http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Java
criticisms of the .net framework http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.net_framework#Criticism
- You must agree that the Criticisms chapter in this article is quite different from your examples. This looks to me like a listing of things about the software that have annoyed the individual users that put them there. None of them have any external references and some of them are plain silly "publishing is slow on slow hardware" for example. In my opinion that list is POV beyond repair and should be deleted. It's quite possible someone can write a NPOV chapter about the same topic, but this is not it. --Sindri 11:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Requested move 17 August 2015
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed for over two weeks. Jenks24 (talk) 20:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
"Like any CMS, the product is as good as the developers who built and designed it. The following points are specific criticisms of one implementation and do not necessarily represent the performance of the software across all implementations."
Open Text Corporation → OpenText – While legally the company name is "Open Text Corporation", WP:NCCORP recommends omitting the "Corporation". And further, per WP:COMMONNAME, I think it's preferable to use "OpenText" without the space, which appears in all of the company's marketing, including logo, and many (most?) third party references.
See also: talk page section #Name -- intgr [talk] 10:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 23:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.