Talk:Laminas: Difference between revisions
→Neutrality: How can we keep this page current while not compromising neutrality? |
→Neutrality: Inquiry in to the nature of the previous neutrality concerns. |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:::Why should be leave a [[WP:NPOV|biased]] article just because the technology is well-known? I'm going to start making it fit neutral point of view policy. [[User:Superm401|Superm401]] - [[User_talk:Superm401|Talk]] 08:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
:::Why should be leave a [[WP:NPOV|biased]] article just because the technology is well-known? I'm going to start making it fit neutral point of view policy. [[User:Superm401|Superm401]] - [[User_talk:Superm401|Talk]] 08:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm the project lead for Zend Framework at Zend Technologies. That said, I'm very interested in this article representing a full and neutral viewpoint of ZF. At the moment it is out of date and doesn't reflect the current goals of the project well; I've made some minor edits to update some information that I hope you will agree are not biased in any way towards Zend. Can you please let me know what the concerns RE: neutrality have been in the past so that I avoid any changes that might bring the neutrality of this article in to question? Thanks. [[User:wllm|wllm]] 08:47 16 December 2007 (UTC) |
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm the project lead for Zend Framework at Zend Technologies. That said, I'm very interested in this article representing a full and neutral viewpoint of ZF. At the moment it is out of date and doesn't reflect the current goals of the project well; I've made some minor edits to update some information that I hope you will agree are not biased in any way towards Zend. Can you please let me know what the concerns RE: neutrality have been in the past so that I avoid any changes that might bring the neutrality of this article in to question? Thanks. [[User:wllm|wllm]] 08:47 16 December 2007 (UTC) |
||
:Hi all, there is some very out-of-date information on this page, and I would really like to update it to reflect the latest. I didn't want to do this, however, until I understood more about the concerns involving neutrality. If any of the users above are still watching this page, please respond via this page or email. If I don't get any responses after 1 week, I plan to update this page because we have a very important release coming up and expect more interest in any info online- wikipedia being not the least of information sources! :) In any case, I will try to get the language as neutral as I can, and I plan to have someone outside Zend review it before submitting any changes. Thanks! [[User:wllm|wllm]] 04:38 22 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== It is a new framework == |
== It is a new framework == |
||
Revision as of 12:40, 22 December 2007
Neutrality
I think the article is a bit biased and I'm not sure if it forfills the requirements for having an article -- Snailwalker | talk 13:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- The article as it currently exists reads like an advertisement for Zend. To say that it could be restated a bit more objectively does not diminish what Zend has accomplished with the framework. As to whether it deserves to be an article, I personally find it useful to have a reference point to explain new technologies - Mark Dixon 19:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- Zend Framework is yet well-known in PHP community, so we should leave the article as it is now. LaminatedCat 10:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Why should be leave a biased article just because the technology is well-known? I'm going to start making it fit neutral point of view policy. Superm401 - Talk 08:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- Zend Framework is yet well-known in PHP community, so we should leave the article as it is now. LaminatedCat 10:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm the project lead for Zend Framework at Zend Technologies. That said, I'm very interested in this article representing a full and neutral viewpoint of ZF. At the moment it is out of date and doesn't reflect the current goals of the project well; I've made some minor edits to update some information that I hope you will agree are not biased in any way towards Zend. Can you please let me know what the concerns RE: neutrality have been in the past so that I avoid any changes that might bring the neutrality of this article in to question? Thanks. wllm 08:47 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi all, there is some very out-of-date information on this page, and I would really like to update it to reflect the latest. I didn't want to do this, however, until I understood more about the concerns involving neutrality. If any of the users above are still watching this page, please respond via this page or email. If I don't get any responses after 1 week, I plan to update this page because we have a very important release coming up and expect more interest in any info online- wikipedia being not the least of information sources! :) In any case, I will try to get the language as neutral as I can, and I plan to have someone outside Zend review it before submitting any changes. Thanks! wllm 04:38 22 December 2007 (UTC)
It is a new framework
This framework is so new(2006, March). It has a long way to got, and their goal is to provide some tools to help developers and complete their library and rule to become an acceptable framework. It is a very promising collection any way as I am using it. It has an implementation of MVC design pattern.