Talk:Microsoft Customer Care Framework

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance). Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows 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.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

Marking writing style as more advert like than reference like: This is happening a lot to this article. Please define why/where you see that writing style so it can be corrected. Simply stating you feel it looks like an advert is useless.

There are no citations except from MS sources.

That is no reason to tag it as an advert. It is reason to tag it as not having external citations. Please do not abuse tags like this.

It is an advertisement. The originator of the article is an MS blogger who writes about CCF. The sources are all from Microsoft.

The originator may have been, but I have performed a number of updates (addition of information, rewriting content to remove any advertising style writing etc...) in the last 2 months and I do not work for Microsoft (feel free to check my IP address and compare it to the country I live in as opposed to any Microsoft bloggers which all seem to be based in America). In regards to the references, I have been responsible for each one of those and I agree they all point to Microsoft made content (which is why I have no problem with the external citation mark), I challange you to search the internet for any external content. CCF is probebly the least used Microsoft product and as such very little (if any) external exists.196.2.124.251 18:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To try and make the article less like an "advert" based on your explanation of why you think it is one, I have listed CCF's competitor and a external news link to a reference customer.196.2.124.251 18:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Product decomposition is acceptable on other product articles on Wikipedia.org. Not sure why it is a problem here. It is not marketing and simply explains the pieces and parts of CCF without opinion. In addition, parts are being removed as marketing without explanation as to why. Explanation of various aspects CCF's is not inherently marketing (see above concerning that this needs more explanation than just the statement). Competitors should probably have their own articles as there are pro-and-cons to everything. I do not know them well enough myself though to write them though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaximumTruth (talk • contribs) 13:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]