PCTechMag.com recently wrote a blog post that provides a few tips on selecting good WordPress plugins. I read through the article and, upon realizing it had flaws, pointed them out in the comments. Rather than use the information to fix the article, PCTechMag.com decided to ignore the comment. Twice.

Here is the comment, outlining the issues they have in their article:

This article has a variety of problems. First of all, it should be mentioned that it applies to plugins found in the WordPress repository and not the plugins found on third party websites. Non repo plugins are not supported on WordPress.org and do not have a ratings/comments page onWordPress.org.

It should also be pointed out that the commenting from plugin authors refers to the comments in the code itself, not on the plugin page or forums. Since this is aimed at someone who doesn’t know a lot about code, the article needs to point this out and explain that the person will need to download the plugin and review the actual code to find PHP commenting (and may need to explain what that looks like for someone who doesn’t understand coding).

It should also read:

“However, WITH thousands of different options to choose from”

“Although identifying well written software is difficult if you don’t know the FIRST thing about code,”

Additionally, the WordPress Design Services company you referred to is violating the WordPress trademark with their URL (“Under no circumstances is it permitted to use WordPress or WordCamp as part of a top-level domain name.”, http://wordpressfoundation.org… ), so I would recommend doing more than a 5 second Google search for those keywords.

The problems in the article are one thing. Removing a comment held for moderation and then not fixing those problems is another. By leaving it as it is, PCTechMag.com is showing that they are fine with typos, vague information and linking to companies infringing on the trademark of the software they are making a mediocre attempt at helping you with.