Talk:Zeus Technology

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 May 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep and expand.

I'm a little confused as to why this page has been marked as advertising.. Any chance you could say what it is you object to rather than delete the whole page.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sambeau (talk • contribs)

There is at least one BBC article meeting WP:V that can be used as a source. See this link. [1] I'm not sure it meets the notability critera for companies at WP:CORP. GRBerry 20:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many article about Zeus: http://finance.google.com/finance?cid=11402422 Electrum (talk) 04:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boborak is a menace to the wikipedian community; not content with showing their lack of knowledge re Unix and 'Unix-like', he is now on a vendetta to delete/change articles related to Zeus. This user needs to be reported. There is no grounds to delete this entry - what next, delete other prominent software companies' articles?--Toph3r 21:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not NPOV

This article is better, but it stills needs to be rewritten in a more encyclopedic style.

Examples:

'currently (2006) is one of the highest-performance' should either have the superlative removed or reference benchmark level(s) of performance so that the article will age properly. Since benchmark level(s) of performance might be a separate section more appropriately under the article about the Zeus Web Server, the first option would seem indicated.

Zeus Webserver is widely accepted as a *very* high performance webserver, mostly due to its use of a tight select() loop poll. You only need to look at SPECweb benchmarks to see how widely ZWS is used in performance benchmarking. There's a reason why specweb testers use ZWS and not Apache/Tomcat/IIS et al. Apache, incidentally, will never be able to achieve the same level of performance ZWS does without a major re-write (ie, loosing their modular model).

You state that this information should be in the ZWS entry, well, I agree. However, this information has been repeatedly removed by other editors previously. Hence, why it has appeared in this article. --Toph3r 02:28, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'The company grew rapidly during the excesses' This might better as 'grew from two employees to 120 employees', or something like that, or elminated as the next two sentences provide the evidence of notability. Rapidly doesn't have a scale, and still sounds like a remnant of the prior self-aggrandizing language. Bejnar 16:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

"Zeus is pronounced as Seuss" is a bit misleading given that the initial sound is [z] not [s]. I don't know IPA well enough to do a good job here though. --Ewx 12:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is not correct. 'Zeus' *is* pronounced 'Seuss' - the intial sound is NOT [z], but [s]. --Toph3r 21:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I used to work there and know people who still do, and you're the first person I've heard suggesting it should be [s].--Ewx 09:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard anyone call it "seuss" before, and I certainly don't see the relationship with the Dr Seuss article, to which that word links. It should be removed. Brits tend to soften the 'Z' slighly on words beginning with 'zu', and lean on the U to make ot sound like a Y so perhaps someone is mishearing this for an 'S' sound? 81.179.112.223 13:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not just be easier to put this matter at rest and e-mail the company and ask them how their name should be pronounced? --Toph3r 21:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(disclaimer: I'm an employee at Zeus ...) It is pronounced like 'zoos', not as Americans say 'zeyous' (or something like that), it is said correctly at http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/pron/Z0012500.wav CrispinFlowerday 10:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(disclaimer: I'm an American ...) I've never heard an American pronounce this word, at least in the context of Greek mythology, as something with two syllables, if that's what you mean. —Fleminra 07:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Zeus Technology. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.zeus.com/news/articles/040415-001/
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.zeus.com/news/press_articles/050303-001.html
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.zeus.com/news/press_articles/061107-001.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:51, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]