Talk:Enterprise Architecture Body of Knowledge

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Systems Mid‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the field of Enterprise modelling.

Books: Reference works

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article is supported by the Reference works task force.

Is this page obsolete?

As of 2024, the EABOK website itself (www.eabok.org) displays a prominent homepage banner, dated 2020, saying the EABOK consortium has ceased operations and the website will be deactivated at a later date.

If the primary website that this wiki article relates to is considered dead and will disappear from the internet at some point, I would argue this wiki article is no longer relevant. Should it be removed, and links to it from other pages cleaned up? Philosophicles (talk) 10:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Can somebody do some peer review please David.t.bath 03:41, 6 November 2006.

article reads like a book review

This article does not deal with the topic of the EABOK as much as it is a review of the EABOK (why it is a "good" thing. This indicates serious wiki style issues. The article needs a major rewrite. I will take a crack at this in the coming weeks. Nickmalik (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dead links

following up on the single commercial citation, the link appears to be dead and there is no current reference to the EABOK on the website. It appears that the EABOK may be a dead project for the company in question and therefore does this page still have relevance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.128.75 (talk) 06:16, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]