Talk:Google Docs vs. Microsoft Word: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger (New page: This article has a variety of problems. First of all, I'm not sure that comparing two word processing formats in this way is an appropriate topic for an article. Are these the only two d...) |
imported>Meg Taylor No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | |||
This article has a variety of problems. First of all, I'm not sure that comparing two word processing formats in this way is an appropriate topic for an article. Are these the only two document types of any interest? Why? If so, perhaps there is a reason to have an article about both of the leading word processing document types. But then, the article needs to be renamed. The word "docs" needs to be replaced with "documents" and "MS" with "Microsoft," and more to the point, something like "Comparison of Google and Microsoft Word document types" would have the proper clarity and descriptiveness we want in the title. | This article has a variety of problems. First of all, I'm not sure that comparing two word processing formats in this way is an appropriate topic for an article. Are these the only two document types of any interest? Why? If so, perhaps there is a reason to have an article about both of the leading word processing document types. But then, the article needs to be renamed. The word "docs" needs to be replaced with "documents" and "MS" with "Microsoft," and more to the point, something like "Comparison of Google and Microsoft Word document types" would have the proper clarity and descriptiveness we want in the title. | ||
| Line 4: | Line 5: | ||
Encyclopedia articles, at least here, should not have a "conclusion" section; we don't draw conclusions. Articles are supposed to be neutral. See [[CZ:Neutrality Policy]] for an explanation of what this means (it isn't obvious). --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 22:56, 15 August 2008 (CDT) | Encyclopedia articles, at least here, should not have a "conclusion" section; we don't draw conclusions. Articles are supposed to be neutral. See [[CZ:Neutrality Policy]] for an explanation of what this means (it isn't obvious). --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 22:56, 15 August 2008 (CDT) | ||
:I wish someone would write a learned article about MS Word vs. WordPerfect, which is clearly the greatest word processing program in the world. Too bad that WordPerfect has just about disappeared except chez the lawyers because of some really dumb marketing and developing decisions made by the people running that company over the years -- at one time it was not only the dominant program in the field, it was dominant because it was so clearly superior.... [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 23:34, 15 August 2008 (CDT) | |||
::Perhaps it should be moved to [[CZ:Cold Storage|cold storage]]? [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Caps and Office vs. Word == | |||
Would someone please change '''all''' "Google docs" to "Google Docs"? Thank you! AND, to consider: is this a comparison between Google Docs and Microsoft Word '''alone''' or with Microsoft '''Office''' and '''all''' the products that it offers? If the latter, then the name of the article should be changed. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 14:20, 17 August 2008 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 21:42, 19 February 2010
|
| Metadata here |
This article has a variety of problems. First of all, I'm not sure that comparing two word processing formats in this way is an appropriate topic for an article. Are these the only two document types of any interest? Why? If so, perhaps there is a reason to have an article about both of the leading word processing document types. But then, the article needs to be renamed. The word "docs" needs to be replaced with "documents" and "MS" with "Microsoft," and more to the point, something like "Comparison of Google and Microsoft Word document types" would have the proper clarity and descriptiveness we want in the title.
One of the earliest sentences, "The debate of which one is more powerful has been lasted for a long time," isn't quite right. The debate can't have lasted for a long time for the simple reason that Google docs haven't existed for a long time.
Encyclopedia articles, at least here, should not have a "conclusion" section; we don't draw conclusions. Articles are supposed to be neutral. See CZ:Neutrality Policy for an explanation of what this means (it isn't obvious). --Larry Sanger 22:56, 15 August 2008 (CDT)
- I wish someone would write a learned article about MS Word vs. WordPerfect, which is clearly the greatest word processing program in the world. Too bad that WordPerfect has just about disappeared except chez the lawyers because of some really dumb marketing and developing decisions made by the people running that company over the years -- at one time it was not only the dominant program in the field, it was dominant because it was so clearly superior.... Hayford Peirce 23:34, 15 August 2008 (CDT)
- Perhaps it should be moved to cold storage? John Stephenson 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Caps and Office vs. Word
Would someone please change all "Google docs" to "Google Docs"? Thank you! AND, to consider: is this a comparison between Google Docs and Microsoft Word alone or with Microsoft Office and all the products that it offers? If the latter, then the name of the article should be changed. Hayford Peirce 14:20, 17 August 2008 (CDT)