Talk:Single source publishing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
--195.19.48.219 11:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)kyaw myat moe
I've attached an NPOV (neutral point of view) tag to this article because I think it offers little besides a personal opinion piece.
It consists essentially of a single sentence defining single source publishing, followed by two brief examples. I don't think this an adequate basis for an article.
The last sentence is particularly questionable: the statement that single source publishing "can be difficult to achieve without the use of some kind of content management system" is an unsubstantiated opinion. I can cite expert opinions that content management systems are a bad idea and that you can do single source publishing with other (less expensive) tools.
Finally, the last two External Links (to the authorit.com and xmetal.com sites) are spam and should be removed.
I'm not convinced that the term 'single source publishing' is worthy of an article outside of marketing literature. If it is, it should adhere to NPOV policy "an article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source." For good examples in the same field, see Technical_writing and Information_architecture.
Denisbradford 15:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
