Talk:Magento

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please try to be objective - filling this page with fluff and propoganda won't server magento or the community. 158.45.1.32 (talk) 05:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

True, I agree. Which is why I twice added some criticism and removed the propaganda. Not necessarily because I consider Magento bad. The wiki police would kill the page in an instant if we try it.

I also think it would be unfair for a genral researcher if we don't lay the cards on the table. Magento doesn't have what to hide anyway. On a side note, I would appreciate if you can sign your name with something better that an IP addy. Try signing up! Kadima100 (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Advertisement

I'm removing the advertisement tag. I cleaned up much of the page and added some criticism and limitations. If anyone thinks that the tag should be there, please by all means add it. However, I'd greatly appreciate if you can write here why you think so. (You are entitled to your opinion.) Oh, and please sing your name. I nice to be identifiable. Kadima100 (talk) 03:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe this article still reads like an advertisement, as it still is based entirely on the official website. It really needs third-party references for the information provided in order to establish notability as per WP:WEB. The features section especially reads as a mirror of the website. Are there any magazines or newspapers that have covered this subject that could be mentioned? —BradV 04:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It was covered by cNet and others (as shown here). These sites don't contain much information. Magento is still young; it should take a while before it gets picked up by the mainstream press. I am leaving the tag until I can get some more references. As for the notability, if you can give some time I'll get you some links. Does cNet qualify? Kadima100 (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References

I have added referenced information to the Overview and History sections. Can the "needs references" tag be removed? Or are there suggestions for improvement so it meets the requirements?

I'm new to editing here and don't know the correct protocol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rowd (talk • contribs) 10:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not long here myself but I've gotten used to some conventions here. If you think it meets the guidelines shown here ( WP:WEB ) then go ahead, remove it. I appreciate the fact thet you created an account. It would be even better if you can sign your comment with four tildes (~). Kadima100 (talk) 01:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Helpfulness of Features Section

Simply put, the features section is not helpful. The description line at the top claims to list "some of the key features" of Magento, but it's really a brain dump of anything the software might do.

If the intent is to list key features, then just list key features and include a mention of the availability of a complete feature list on Magento's site. This will better serve people reading the article and prevent stale links in the Wikipedia entry (as Magento's features page even indicates the page may change without notice).

I'm just not sure a full feature list in a bad format is in line with Wikipedia standards or even helpful for people reading the article.

Rszrama (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. If anyone can help narrow down the list it would greatly improve the page. Kadima100 (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)