Raghublr

WET Web Tester

Hello,

I am new user and have been trying to write some article on the wikipedia. I started off by writing about WET, an opensource web testing tool. It got deleted more than once as I had apparently not followed certain Wiki Ethos. After looking through some of the guidelines, I have rewritten the complete article and have tried to follow the guidelines. I would like your help to review this article. I have put it up as a user sandbox page at User:Raghublr/Sandbox. If you could review it once and mark your comments in the page, I will make changes appropriately and add it as an article called Wet Web Tester. I am using the same sandbox user page's talk page as the communication media.

-- Best regards, Best regards, Raghu V 07:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Raghu,

Thanks for your note, and your hard work on Wet Web Tester. I think your article looks much better; you've included references and footnotes, and have for the most part followed WP:MOS. Nice job! However, a few observations:

1) You may not push products on Wikipedia. If this is a program you yourself have worked on, I strongly urge you not to create this article, as then the article becomes something only used to promote a product, something which is against Wikipedia policy. The History section is alarming, as it mentions what the developers thought, without providing a single reference. If you developed the product, you should not promote this product on Wikipedia. If you did not develop this product, how do you know what the developers thought? Provide sources for your assertions.

2)You must assert notability in the article. Why is WET notable? Has it been reviewed in major computing magazines? Do X amount of people use it every day? If so, provide links to reliable sources which back up the assertion.

3) Keep in mind Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy. Does the product have critics? If so, that should also be mentioned in the article.

4)Replace all instances of "you" with "the user"; this helps keep the material encyclopedic in tone.

If you can address these concerns, in my opinion there is no reason the article can't go up. Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 21:13, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• I can only mimic what the other guys have said - keep up th good work :) AussieWiki2006 10:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Firsfron,

Thanks for your valuable comments. I have made the changes as per your comment. Unfortunately I am unable to locate the web url where there some info about why WET was born. Therefore, I have taken it off from there, till I can find it. Regaarding the usage of the product, I follow the user list and I know there are quite a few users, but dont have any citation to back it up. I will put up those details when i can locate those.

--Best regards, Raghu V 18:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

• 
  I award Raghu V barnstar in appreciation of contributions to article related to Software Testing. --Pinecar 08:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)