Content deleted Content added
Line 84:
I found it very informative though, and filled with useful information <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/132.183.102.105|132.183.102.105]] ([[User talk:132.183.102.105|talk]]) 23:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Sure, it may have information in it, but that doesn't change the fact that it is not suitable for Wikipedia in its current form. [[User:EboMike|EboMike]] ([[User talk:EboMike|talk]]) 02:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
'''Page is very useful''' - An encylopedia at best is a source of useful knowledge, this page contains a great deal of useful information.
In response to arguments that this is irrelevant:
*These are two proprietary products produced by competing corporations.
Ignoring how C# is an open standard, why would this matter? If there was an article on advertising strategies of Coca-Cola and Pepsi it would still be interesting and useful.
*Many of the details are volitile (sic) and the article will quickly go stale.
That what we know changes is not a reason to never teach. What is the current status of hormone replacement therapy? How about dietary recommendations of sodium levels?
*Other issues related to colors and verbosity
Someone cleaned these up "try {" in Java versus "try\n\t{" in C#. Variable usage of white space is irrelevant, the reader will know that, ditto with colors.
*Bias
If informations is incorrect or presented in a poor fashion, it should be removed. This is an entirely separate issue.
*Not Encyclopedic
Admittedly, Britannica probably would not have this article. Britannica is also not as good as wikipedia. This article is a compendium recommending a lot of good information. People need to get things done with computers, C/Java/Python/C++/C#/Haskell are all ways to get stuff done, how do they compare? Many people have found this article useful.
| |||