This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C/C++ 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.
I'm going to remove every last POV phrase related to lack of support or documentation. I wonder what would happen if I edited some open source project's page on WP and added things like "though created by IBM|RedHat, it is not supported" or "this application has no documentation whatsoever, so a few people started a project to do that, yikes". And WTL is supported, if you're willing to pay for that. Kinda like RedHat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk)
If such open source libraries are developed but unsupported, the only reasonable thing to do for their articles would be to add that information. Just because such information may be lacking elsewhere, doesn't mean that information should be taken away from this one. The net result of that action would be a worsening of Wikipedia's quality, not an improvement. Always try being constructive. As for the reason this is brought up here, it is probably particularly because Microsoft used to support the library. If you can get paid support for this library, yes, then that should be added to the article too. I don't quite understand why you didn't, because that seemed like not too well-known information and would be useful to have here, as well as whom to contact. — Northgrove 11:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I've now updated the page to add a bit of information on the support issue. — Northgrove 11:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)