Talk:Delrina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Delrina is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 4, 2006.
Article Milestones Date Process Result November 6, 2005 Peer review Reviewed November 28, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted December 16, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Engtech article has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.

Further areas for possible improvement:

• logo, box shots, screenshots, etc.
• info on Delrina's financials (necessary?)
• more detailed info on the forms product line, including one screenshot/picture (necessary?)
• listing of companies that followed in Delrina's wake by principles/ex-employees
• create at least stub articles for the products mentioned in the intro paragraph

Captmondo 02:21, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I contracted for the Kirkland office for eight weeks in October/November 1994, working on the Mac version of their screensavers. —Ashley Y 00:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Annual revenue

What currency is the annual revenue in? US dollars or Canadian dollars? Pburka 02:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Canadian dollars. --Optichan 14:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of criticism

The lack of critical content in this article is striking. What's with the boosterism for Echo Park? Tempshill 18:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

• "Boosterism"? It *was* an innovative product for the time, and the text is critical saying that it was a product arguably too far ahead of its time to be used in the way intended. And as I responded to a similar question when this was up as a Feature Article candidate, I replied that frankly, there was some criticisms that were floating around about how the firm was run, but nothing I could find *that was documented*. Rumour has no place in an article striving to be encyclopedic. In the end I think the most damning criticism about the firm is the fact that almost none of its products lived long after the company was bought by Symantec -- which I don't see so much as a criticism of Symantec, save for the fact that perhaps they paid too much. But there again, that is opinion, not fact... I would encourage you to find documented dirt, and add it where appropriate to the article. ;-) For me the exercise was more about documenting an innovative software firm about which has otherwise faded from memory. Captmondo 13:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow, great article

No, really, it's fantastic. Maury 21:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)