Have you ever edited #Wikipedia? 
(Boost for some reach? 🥺)
Have you ever edited #Wikipedia? 
(Boost for some reach? 🥺)
@theresnotime
I was editing a page about Generative Art. There was a section of relevant websites and software.
WK Editor reproached me for adding a link to my (free) software. They removed my edit.
But in the links, they had no problem leaving a link to a commercial company who sells online training.
That was a slap in the face for me.
( ⬇️ )
So:
- You work on a subject, so you know well the topic.
- you add a link RELEVANT to the topic (to a non-commercial website).
- you get kicked because it's YOUR website.
Errr... of course it's my website. This is were I publish my projects.
Duh.
(PS: There are ZERO ads on my website. and I sell nothing.)
Basically, they didn't even CHECK if the added information was relevant to the topic.
They saw that the URL was ressembling my wikipedia pseudo, so they just blocked everything from me.
@theresnotime
Oh they were not interested in talking. This was a "no".
This makes me wonder how much information gets pushed back just because editors don't even CHECK if the information is revelant (which... well.. should be the main concern).
(And how many good wills totally abandon Wikipedia edition because of this.)
I’ve come across this as well. It seems they think a second hand source of information is better than a first hand source. In this case, if someone else mentioned your free product it would be worth something, but not you touting your own stuff.
In your case it’s silly, but I can understand their position.