Talk:PHP Development Tools

message: :Image:PDT Debugging.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PDT Debugging.png

message: I am a co-lead on the PHPEclipse projects which is midly bashed in this page, without serious references. Statements like : 
"Before development on PDT started, PHPEclipse was decidedly the most used PHP plugin for Eclipse. It was functional for most aspects of PHP development, but debugging support and inline autocomplete functionality was lacking in quality. Development on this plugin has been continued, and version 1.2.0 is much more feature complete than PDT in some areas. www.phpeclipse.net"
... are pure FUD and BS, and unsubstantiated. I will NOT edit those, as that would be a conflict of interest. But I would appreciate if someone does, in a wAy that if there are comparaisons that are made they are substantiated by facts, and not qualitative and presented in the past tense.
Note that the PHPEclipse and the PDT projects are both open source projects (oine is company sponsored PDT, the other one PHPEclipse is community supported). That does not mean there has to be competition, especially on a reference wikipedia page.
--Pombredanne 01:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought exactly the same, even before reading your comment. I thus replaced the non-neutral sentences by neutral ones. Then I thought that this § was not so useful and I deleted it. Why should the article on PDT talk about PHPEclipse? If it is considered useful, then symetrically we would also need the article about PHPEclipse to talk about PDT. And the content would probably be duplicated. A different page comparing PHPEclipse and PDT would certainly be useful, though. But I won't do it (not enough knowledge on the subject).--OlivierMiR (talk) 11:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: About the comments made on PHPEclipse 

message: * Remove or rewrite speculative/unreferenced/unencyclopedic statements such as "The project intends to encompass all development components [..]" and "One of the interesting issues surrounding PDT [..]"
* bold "header" text in the lead , maybe should have its own header
* de-capitalize headers
* There is a star ("*") in the middle of the text.
Fred-J 09:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyedit suggestions