Content deleted Content added
Line 132:
I could go on but suffice it to say this article is very misleading. There is really no substitute for good programming and part of that is understanding the code that is being written in its context (so that when something doesn't work, you find out why, not try something new). <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.142.127.235|86.142.127.235]] ([[User talk:86.142.127.235|talk]]) 08:14, 19 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I concur. It's typical of many articles that spew opinion as if fact; some of which shut out or flame people with differing opinions who would make corrections. Rather than relying on factual evidence, there's a tendency to accept content generally on consensus of those most dedicated to pushing their views. I've done my part here to incrementally address the problem, but there's a long way to go and it involves a systemic problem, and there's no guarantee that positive changes won't be reverted, and many like me who do real research & development don't have the time to deal with the problem appropriately.
[[Special:Contributions/132.160.49.90|132.160.49.90]] ([[User talk:132.160.49.90|talk]]) 19:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
== why is the refactoring browser "so-called" ? ==
| |||