Jump to content

Talk:Unity Version Control

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Josve05a (talk | contribs) at 21:27, 17 April 2014 (did I make a mistake? Please tell me about it! – clean up per WP:TPL using AWB (10077)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Tags

Hi, please, could you specify which content should be removed from our wikipedia web page in order to agree with wikipedia legislation?? Becouse, after reviewing many other web page from our direct competitors,i don´t find any difference between at all. Thank you. 213.254.84.80 (talk) 11:05, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


This is an ad and a poor one at that, Please delete this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.238.177 (talkcontribs) 17:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

offensive ads

This product was only brought to my attention by an advertisement by the vendor, which I (as a man, if that's important to you) found offensive and degrading of women. And yet the article has nothing to say about how the product has been advertised? Are we really expected to believe that absolutely no one of any notability has published material related to this advertising? — 184.32.175.25 (talk) 00:15, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sources...

The DrDobbs link is a press-release rather than a review. The same for EETimes, etc. (reviews should contrast alternatives and pros/cons rather than solely citing nice things to say about a product). It appears that only the screenshots posted by de Icaza are independent commentary - and still not a review, per se. TEDickey (talk) 10:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]