Talk:RosettaNet

"Who are we?". Hardly NPV!

I added the POV dispute, obviously written by RosettaNet. Dont know much about them. Are they even Wikipedia worthy?Bart 18:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted back to the last edit before a POV article was added.Bart 00:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article could be better, but a global industry standard is for sure something for wikipedia. Have a look on the German Wikipedia entry - it is done very well. [Rolf] 13:22, 31 May 2006 (CET)

Bias and Sources

The article says RosettaNet exists, "to create and implement industry-wide, open e-business process standards." If they are so open and widespread, how come I need a username and password just to read them? I agree, there is a serious Point-of-View issue here. Footnotes from sources not associated with RosettaNet are badly needed.

One of the people on this talk page suggested reading the Germain version which reads (if possible) even more like it was cut-and-pasted from the RosettaNet website. After significant searching, I've actually found some third-party sources of information:

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=RosettaNet&i=50623,00.asp

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/83809/RosettaNet

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1017-5067582.html

http://www.zdnet.com/news/rosettanet-takes-standards-push-to-small-firms/138446

http://www.zdnet.com/news/microsoft-releases-rosettanet-tools/123787

Also, not so free: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5449/is_200812/ai_n31425104/

Hopefully someone who has more experience with RosettaNet than I can use these to clean up this article.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by GlenPeterson (talk • contribs) 14:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]