Talk:Route planning software: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:43, 20 March 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Route planning software redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Software: Computing Redirect‑class Low‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Maps Redirect‑class Low‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MapsWikipedia:WikiProject MapsTemplate:WikiProject MapsMaps articles
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WIKI is NOT a place for crass advertisement

One manufacturer of routing software has posted advertisements for their product. The fact that they have to resort to such crass advertising says ALOT about the company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.27.165 (talk) 17:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References?

There don't seem to be any references on this page, specifically for the claims of issues in particular route planning products. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohaq (talk • contribs) 15:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Moved from User talk:Route planning software. 21:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm trying to add an external link to the page Route Planning Software. It is really usefull and it is not spam or advertisement. However, I failed and now searates.com is regarded as spam link. How can be this problem resolved? Thanks 93.180.205.47 (talk) 19:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

searates.com was added to the spam blacklist after somebody started adding their link to any page even slightly related to sea shipping. Encyclopaedic articles should remain neutral; this is especially important with generic articles such as this one. If the company is noteworthy, a Wikipedia page may be created for them (and if a Category is added to the page, listed on the relevant Category page), and on their page their website may be externally linked in the Infobox sidebar. However this company page should also be written in an encyclopaedic style, from an impartial standpoint, and should not be written as an advertisement - For example, if a company has won any prolific industry awards, they might be worthy of mention on their Wikipedia page, however the article itself can't refer to the company/their software as "really useful", as this is subjective opinion, and violates the impartial standpoint required.

If you're unsure as to what constitutes good practice when editing Wikipedia articles, I suggest checking out the Five pillars article for a basic overview, and the links on the Wikipedia:Principles page if you want to go into them in greater detail. Rohaq (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 18:43, 20 March 2016 edit Rohaq (talk \| contribs) 71 edits →‎Untitled ← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:43, 20 March 2016 edit undo Rohaq (talk \| contribs) 71 edits m →‎Untitled Next edit →
Line 17:		Line 17:

	If you're unsure as to what constitutes good practice when editing Wikipedia articles, I suggest checking out the [[Wikipedia:Five_pillars\|Five pillars]] article for a basic overview, and the links on the [[Wikipedia:Principles]] page if you want to go into them in greater detail.		If you're unsure as to what constitutes good practice when editing Wikipedia articles, I suggest checking out the [[Wikipedia:Five_pillars\|Five pillars]] article for a basic overview, and the links on the [[Wikipedia:Principles]] page if you want to go into them in greater detail.
			[[User:Rohaq\|Rohaq]] ([[User talk:Rohaq\|talk]]) 18:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)