|WikiProject Computing / Software||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
The originating writer of this piece is user:Ajaxguru(correct link, userpage not created) and limits their contribution to Wikipedia to articles relating to SmartClient, the Ajax framework and a few other connected items. Outside of these the only other use was to complain to another contributor about the removal of external links. Insofar that both SmartClient and Ajax have plenty of Google hits from many sources this is obviously an appropriate subject for Wikipedia, but it seems to have been possibly created solely as a form of publicity or promotion by someone closely related to the subject. There is no obvious POV, but after the introduction the article reads like a marketing pitch. Perhaps someone with experience of the software/platform/whateveritis (it means nothing to me) can edit the article? I suggest that, whilst assuming WP:good faith, that any comments by user Ajaxguru should be weighed carefully. LessHeard vanU 21:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've edited the page to remove words that might be objectionable (eg "complete"). If you still feel this needs to be branded an advert, perhaps consult with someone technical first - many of the remaining terms that might sound like marketing speak are simply industry terms (eg metadata-driven) and there is no clearer way to refer to the concept.. Re: my contributions, unfortunately, I made many anonymous contributions before creating an account. I can see how you'd get the wrong idea. - AjaxGuru
- I don't need to speak to anyone to think it reads like an advert, since I am approaching it as an average reader and not someone familiar with the buzzwords. I have no comment to make regarding the content, as I assume (per WP:good faith) that it is correct, but the only the style. Bulletin points and choppy sentences are unencyclopedic (or at least unWikipedic) and read like Technical Manuals or advertising copy. However, per your comments, I shall not be re-instating the "Advert" tag.
- I note that your contribution history indicates that you have made no other contributions than those already indicated above, as regards this username. Perhaps you might consider spending some time reviewing similar articles in WP to get a feel how to apply the standard style to this article to avoid future misunderstandings? In short, the content deserves a Wikipedia article but it should be rendered in the proper style. LessHeard vanU 22:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
The main issue with style is that it gives very little context. For example, is it a floor wax, or a desert topping? I think it is computer software, so should say that. Also gives no indication as to the history. Which decade did it exist in, for example? Did anyone use it? And of course a subject in Wikipedia needs to show its "notability" by having citations to independent verifiable sources, and this does not. W Nowicki (talk) 16:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)