Talk:Trello

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 February 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Software: Computing Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Trello Marketing Removal

All content removed was from the companies own website. It is advertising/marketing when the companies plants information in wikipedia and then uses their own website to back it up.

Thereandnot (talk) 13:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. If it's a direct copy of their text, then it's a copyright violation and should be removed, otherwise. it's just supported by a primary source, which isn't ideal, but not wrong. I have a serious problem with your editing though. I think you should avoid editing articles by your competitors until you have a better understanding of how Wikipedia works. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These claims are not verafiable anywhere expect their own website. Small companies like these can claim anything on their website and it is not true. These are Self-Published sources WP:BLPSPS.

Competitors? What the hell are you taking about?! You are showing bad faith(WP:BADFAITH). I am not a competitor to this company. I am just calling this advertising like it is!

Thereandnot (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I confused you with an editor who has been complaining about articles like this and gutting them. Since you have cleared up my confusion, I need to clear yours up. Since this is not a biography of a living person, BLPSPS does not apply, WP:PRIMARY does: "Unless restricted by another policy, reliable primary sources may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them". The material is not being misused as far as I can see, but perhaps you can explain it. I have restored the material while we discuss this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:35, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the article to make it seem less deceptive to users. There is a healthy skepticism around these numbers they are pushing. They are the only ones reporting them. Thereandnot (talk) 02:32, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]