User talk:Nposs/Archive 2

(Untitled discussion from 27 Feb., 2007)

Hi Nposs.

Regarding your message below. I understand your concerns. If you are referring to the external links for the Society for the Art of Imagination, Labyrinthe, or beinArt.org, they are all directly relevant in each situation as the artists in question are members of these groups.

I'll read up on the external link guidelines (see WP:EL).

Thanks. --Leo Plaw 03:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

"External links Thank you for your recent contributions. Please keep in mind that external links must be directly related the topic of an article. General links to websites not directly related to articles violate external link guidelines (see WP:EL). Please keep in mind that adding the same url to several articles (even in good faith) is often viewed as a form of linkspam. Nposs 15:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)"

beinart.org

I see you have dutifully removed any links to that site.

Each artist was personally asked permission or requested to be added to that site. It has relevance to each artist (article) as it is the only site on the internet to give a comprehensive overview of the related art genres (which often cross over) and puts them in context.

If you feel any links to beinart.org are inappropriate, then you should also be removing the links to Labyrinthe, which you retained. It could be percieved as being vendictive.

Please explain your edits, I do not understand your bias. --Leo Plaw 03:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Nothing vindictive. You added links to general websites (beinart and labyrinthe). As I noted on your talk page, external links should relate directly to articles. Both of the websites are fine in their own right, but providing a link to the homepage of each is not directly related to the article. Rather than blinding eliminating them, I took the time to look at the links. The labyrinthe website had a link to "galleries" (or something similar). So, if you noticed in my edits, I went back and made the links more direct to the galleries of the various artists. (This is in part not possible because of some strange frame or something the website uses. But the link I added went straight to the gallery selection screen from which the artists names are visible.) The beinart site had no such obvious link and from the description you left in the link title, I could not find any direct relationship between the site and artists. So, I went back and looked again after your message. There are galleries there, but you have to dig for them. You certainly are welcome to go back and reinsert the beinart links with a more direct address. For example: Peter Gric - direct link = http://beinart.org/artists/peter-gric/?GID=514. Nposs 03:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nposs. Thanks for getting back to me. OK, I see what you are driving at now. I'll be more specific with my external linking from now on. The artist galleries for beinart.org, can also be accessed such as: http://beinart.org/artists/peter-gric without the query string.

I also recently added an external link to De Es, under References. The link points directly to an article that he wrote specifically for the beinArt.org site regarding Fantastic Art. I think this fits your criteria. ;-)

In the near future I will also add one to Alex Grey, as there is also an article written by the artist in question regarding the Visionary art genre.

Please advise me if I'm erring here.

Thank you for your friendly and helpful reply. I'm still learning the ins and outs of Wikipedia.

Kind Regards,

--Leo Plaw 03:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmong Flag

Hi NPoss,

Thank for the moving of the Hmong flag to further discussion. I understand the concern for the use of such symbol when considering it as representative of the Hmong people. Per your argument "Hmong people are a diverse and international community." However, as far as I know this is the only one of two flags that I know of so far to claim or share such representation.

I hope in the near future the Hmong people will come together and agree on the uses on one of such symbol to represent itself. Until then, I would like to encourage anyone who wish to use this opportunity to explore further on the unity of the Hmong people to take action and showing their contributing to the building of the new United Hmong nationalism.

Last, if anyone should have a question or comment on "my Hmong flag" or (United Hmong Nationalism Flag)please email me or leave me a message or who's wish to contribution their own symbol for purpose of discussion are welcome to join the Hmong Flag discussion group.

Thank you,

Txivyawg

I believe in individual right and the right of the people to believe and to use such symbol to represent itself. The only question left is when will that be?

Thanks for you note. I know you have only the best intentions. Good luck with your work. Nposs 18:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello NPoss,

That's a good question. I believe whenever you choose to accept such symbol as a representive of yourself then that is when such symbol represent you.

For more information http://www.motherofwriting.com/flags.html

Txivyawg

removing usefull links

Nposs;

While I can appreciate that you're looking out for the best interests of the community in removing 'commercial links' from places, I have to differ with your removing links to the Canon XL2 DVD Guide from the Canon XL2 wiki - here's my reasoning:

The Wiki on the Canon XL2 PRODUCT is brief and probably does not address the needs of those who are looking for more extensive information, which it is probably not even prudent to provide on wikipedia. The reason I added the link to the DVD guide was because I had purchased one myself and found it extremely useful and informative, so I thought that anyone who is looking for pretty extensive information about the Canon XL2 will ALSO find the DVD useful. Sure it's a 'commercial' DVD - but the Canon XL2 is a 'commercial' product - let's not fool ourselves, it's a camcorder that is for sale and not an enterprise on the part of Canon to fill the world with talented videomakers. So the question becomes - will we support the 30 Billion companies like Canon, but not the little guys who are making useful 'accessories' (which I guess is what this DVD can be considered) even though on the guy's website he's clearly talking about the fact that he's doing this 'commercial' venture in large part to help people get the knowledge of the cameras that so many people crave. I guess the 'correct' thing to do would be for me to start a new wiki about this DVD - but then we'd have even more stuff to wade through to get usefull info. That's why I thought tha putting up a simple link would be sufficient. And by the way, I'm not being paid by this guy to 'promote' his DVDs. I put up the link because I had personal experience with the DVD and knew it to be useful.

Let me know your thoughts on this, I don't know that I have the time and/or energy to put up a wiki about the DVD, but maybe it will be worthwhile since it seems the whole point of wikipedia is to have usefull information - or am I getting that wrong?

Vladimir —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.31.215.83 (talk) 01:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for the note. Reviewing the link, I don't see a way it could pass WP:EL. Its a link to website that is simply selling a product. I would also add that information on how to use a product is really not what wikipedia is for (WP:NOT). Your intentions seem great and if you ever get around to it, Wikibooks:How-tos_bookshelf is just the place to contribute how-to information (not the commercial links, though.) Good luck. Nposs 03:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Nposs;

I take your point that it might not pass rules because it IS a link to a site selling a product - but let me ask you this; if this were a book and not a DVD would you consider it appropriate to list a book about the camera in the wiki or as a link? I'm not sure that I agree with you that information on how to use a product is wikipedia is for - I think that lots of people come to wikipedia to that type of info, or as a source to find more info. It all depends on a 'philosophical' question of how deep should wikipedia go, right? If I had NO CLUE as to what a 'canon xl2' is the wiki on the camera would give me some info: but if I knew what the 'canon xl2' was but wanted more in-depth info, the wiki would not only be useless but would not point me in the direction of finding more info. What is what I was hoping to do by adding the link. I'll check out the how-tos_bookshelf, since i'm not familiar with it, but my intention was not to teach people about the camera (since that's not my area of expertise) my intention was to point people to a source of information I had personal knowledge of as being usefull and I was trying to share my personal knowledge with others there by, hopefully, making it useful. I'm not sure that there's a way to accomodate that on wikipedia, but I think it would be usefull. Maybe I'll just add it to the main body text of the article somehow? Anyway, thanks for your response.

Vladimir 75.31.215.83 19:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Your intentions appear to be good but I strongly recommend against adding the information into the content of the article. This is not based on just my opinion, but a variety of guidelines that have been developed by the community. For example

• WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided #4: Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.
• WP:NOT#SOAP #3: Wikipedia is not a medium for advertising.
• WP:NOT#IINFO #4: Wikipedia articles should not include instructions or advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s.

WP:SPAM#How_not_to_be_a_spammer #1 Wikipedia is not a space for personal promotion or the promotion of products

I don't believe the medium makes any difference, dvd or book. Adding the content to the article is basically a promotion of a commercial product and probably would be interpreted as spam. This is just my opinion and if you really want to add the material I would recommend proposing it on the external link talk page Wikipedia_talk:External_links. You can get feedback from a wider variety of editors there. Good luck. Nposs 21:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.

Nposs,

Thanks for clarifying appropriate links for me. I think I get it now.

MsAriel

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for the note. Nposs 03:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Macau business

Greetings,

I am trying to write a page about a three year old magazine in Macau "Macau Business" but for some reason you deleted it. Am not trying to advertise. I am, however, providing general and proven legal information about this magazine. I've read other articles about magazines and newspapers and found the content quite similar.

I am also new to Wiki, hence making a lot of changes as I learn.

Best regards, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Macaubusiness (talk • contribs) 03:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

I didn't delete the article so I can't help you with that. But I urge to you reconsider your planned edits. Contributing material about websites and businesses you are affiliated with is considered conflict of interest. Please read WP:COI. I would also recommend reading about "notability" WP:NOTABILITY as well as the notability guidelines for organizations/companies WP:ORG and WP:SPAM. Nposs 03:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Nposs,

Thank you for your help. I went and read the links you provided. I agree that one could argue conflict of interest. On the other hand many media and commercial companies, big and small, have started their own wiki page because they believe the content is worthy of note. My proposal is not to advertise a tabloid magazine but make a note of it's existence and give out some details of its operation.

Following your suggestion, I have posted my proposal for the article so you can judge it's worth. I will also post it here for your reference. Also, following your reading suggestions, I've included a link in this text to an USA Today article - of the the most international newspapers in the world - where the magazine is quoted. This is not the only international quotation but a most recognisable one. Again my thanks for helping this Wiki noob.

Best regards, MB

--Macaubusiness 04:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Garden City,NY page

I'm new to Wikipedia and don't know all of the protocols, so please excuse my question.

It seems you help steward the article about Garden City, NY. As you might have noticed, some user who makes many, many changes to that article and seems to consider it his/her fiefdom took offense to my discussion-page suggestion that the Garden City article should include a references to the village's (now illegal, of course) deed restrictions prohibiting sales to blacks, Jews and other theoretically undesireable groups, and resulting, continuing legacy of an amazingly homogenous (I won't say "lily-white" -- hah!) community. (During the early 20th century developers' advertisements even used terms akin to "controlled population" to signal the prohibition on non-whites and non-Christians in the village.)

This person (who I gather is not a Wikipedia employee or even a registered member) went so far as to entirely delete my submission while accusing me of "bias" and "hypocrisy." (The prson also deleted parts that were unrelated to race, such as recommendations for more notable residents, which is inexplicable.)

My questions are:

• Is it acceptable for that person to have deleted my entire submission (including notable residents)?
• And would it be acceptable for me to somehow resurrect my comments? What is the protocol?

I don't want to get into an infantile spitting match with the person who censored and slandered me, but I also don't like the thought of that person having stifled my comments and attempted to sanitize the Garden City article to fit their views.

Thank you for your time and attention. I don't know if I'll see your reply here, so please feel encouraged to write me at david a-t djohnstons d-o-t com.

(Please feel free to delete this posting when you read it/reply. It needed be saved for prosperity.

First, welcome to Wikipedia. You can learn a lot by visiting Help:Contents. There are a few standard protocols that are worth learning (like signing your messages on talk pages with four tildes to leave your signatiture). There are no employees here, just volunteer editors - and anyone can edit an article. You don't even need a user name/account (although, it is free and anonymous and makes communicating with other editors a lot easier.) It was inappropriate for your comments to be removed and I have restored them, although I certainly am not the gatekeeper of any article. (To restore your comments, I just went back through the edit history, copied them from an earlier version and pasted them back in with an edit summary indicating my actions.) As for the notable residents, unless you have references to back them up, it is difficult to argue that they should be kept (see WP:OR and WP:RS). I think your suggested contributions could potentially be interesting additions to the article. (The talk page was the correct place to suggest them). Before going forward, especially with potentially controversial edits, you'll need to have some sources/references to back you up. If you have this information, edit into the appropriate parts of the article, and add the proper citations - I think it could be a valuable contribution. Good luck. By the way, every thing on Wikipedia is kept for posterity. Every page has a history from which every previous version of it can be accessed. Nposs 23:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Link Deleted

Dear Nposs -

The link you removed that I posted was not spam. After adding it I checked and it did not seem to have saved so I added it again. Only after it wasn't there the second time did I check the history and see that you had taken it down.

My apologizes for adding it twice, I felt it was a good resource.

It doesn't appear to be a "bad" website, but the content is basically the same as the content already found in the articles on Wikipedia. Nposs 18:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed link on SMS article

Hey, Nposs, I appreciate your vigilance in removing spam links. However I think you went a little overboard on Feb. 20, in deleting the link to my SMS information site (http://www.sms411.net). Prior to that the link had been on the SMS (Short Message Service) article on Wikipedia for about 6 months.

Yes, SMS411.net does carry advertising. However the site is also one of the few impartial sources of accurate, non-technical information about SMS for end users. The other links in the "External Links" category are links to highly technical info about the back-end workings of SMS systems. So I think there's good justification for including a resource like SMS411.net that serves end users, not engineers.

Among the information which SMS411.net includes (which the Wikipedia article does not offer) are details on each major US carrier's rates, links to customer service URLs, and details on how to send email to each carrier's SMS gateway. I have specifically avoided filling the site up with lots of irrelevant SMS news; I've tried to keep everything on the site useful to ordinary SMS users, germane to the topic of SMS, limited to U.S. carriers, and well-organized. So I'm a bit puzzled as to why you feel it doesn't belong in the Wikipedia article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.121.49.191 (talk) 05:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for the note. It seems like a fine website, but the external link guidelines are very specific about not linking to blogs or personal websites WP:EL. Adding the link yourself also poses the problem of "conflict of interest" WP:COI. If you really feel like it should be included, the proper course of action is to propose it on the talk page of the article and let other editors decide if it is appropriate to add to the article or not. Nposs 12:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Mvno

RE: [1]. I added the section header, so it'll show in my (and your) watchlist when a link is added. The section was definately becoming a WP:SPAMHOLE. cheers--Hu12 16:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a good technique. I'll have to remember that one. Thanks. Nposs 17:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sit tight, dude!

Holy sh*t! It's 2AM; and I just started the damn Rickshaw Inn entry. It wil take a few days as I research more of this inn's illustrious history. Our family has been involved with Cherry Hill for a half-century; and there is much to say as I go back to the Cherry Hill Library's township history room in the basement... Which my parents have contributed many artifacts to. Discpad 07:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC) Dan Schwartz

I didn't propose that the article should be deleted. That was User:Realkyhick. You had removed the db template when you placed the hangon tag on the article. Both have to stay on the page - so I replaced it. Nposs 07:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Polite response

Please see this. Do me a favor, before you decide to chime in and add your two cents...please make sure they are worth it.--Looper5920 09:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sockpuppetry

Ah, hm. I've given the IP in question a 2-week softblock, since it doesn't seem to be getting much (if any) use by other people, and I can see several cases where our spammer appears to have used it in the past. Feel free to let me know if they pop up again. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Requesting your help with an article...

An article that I'm trying to improve is constantly being vandalized. Specifically people keep removing a picture from it for baseless personal reasons. The article is Bodybuilding and the image is the 1st one listed in "Areas of Bodybuilding" with the caption "Natural bodybuilder posing." The image isn't the best image in the world but it's the best FREE image I have that fits the description listed. So can you keep an eye on it for me? I have a feeling it will be removed from new users pretty frequently and I can't watch it 24/7. So if you see that it's been removed can you add it back as it was? Thanks. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 05:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Special education

• 'Special schools do provide special education, that is ALL that they do.

do you agree with this statement...that is what Brideshead said.

This is what I said. Special schools are schools that cater to students who have special educational needs. Therefore special schools do not have regular classrooms because normal students could not go to a special school. Do you agree with me, or Brideshead? (RainingmySoul 20:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC))

Two issues: 1# Please do not frame disagreements in terms of "I" vs. "them." It is not a matter of disagreeing with your or agreeing with someone else. Wikipedia is not a popularity contest WP:NOT. #2 I would suggest that saying that "special schools do not have regular classrooms" is an unnecessary distinction. This is a question of semantics and it is unclear how each author is using the term. If you believe this is an important distinction to make (and it is unclear to me how this relates to any article) I recommend finding a reputable reference that can define "regular classroom" rather than engaging in an unproductive war of words. For what it is worth, you and Brideshead are more in agreement than disagreement: "Special schools provide special education" is equivalent to "Special schools cater to students who have special needs." Nposs 05:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I would just like to say that I appreciate your assistance in resolving this edit-situation. I apologise for the strenght of my recent language to rainingmy soul, which is out of character. Emotions are running high but your contributions are helping to calm the waves and it is appreciated. --www.secularism.org.uk 21:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Backpacking

You're invited to be a part of WikiProject Backpacking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to backpacking. To accept this invitation, click here!

I'm sorry if I ran afoul of some editorial policy

Hi there,

I was just adding links to my product to some relevant pages. I was not adjusting the articles in any way nor removing anything competitive. It was just the "external links" and one comparison page. Is this OK?

Nwainwright 04:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Here are some guidelines to read:

• Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising WP:NOT#SOAP
• Avoiding editing in cases of conflict of interest WP:COI
• Adding external links for the puprose of promotion is not allowed WP:SPAM and WP:EL

There are lots of other ways to constructively contribute to Wikipedia and I hope you decide to stick around and help. Nposs 04:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess I don't understand how those other external links got in there

They seem to be promoting their own sites as well. I can see that you removed them all out of timesheet. I guess that's the best solution. Thanks for responding. I'm new to this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nwainwright (talk • contribs) 04:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Hello Nposs

I see you have removed some external links from the Time Sheet article. Some of the links were perhaps questionable, and I support their removal.

I understand your concerns, and it is vital that we protect the project from spam and commercial intrusion - but equally, we nust recognise that there are commercial sites out there that can be a valuable resource.

There are very few commercial sites that offer truely 'free' resources - I placed a link to one that (a) does precisely that, with no strings, and (b) I judged as a very valuable visual demonstration of what a time sheet really is. In terms of bridging language barriers and adding to content value in WEikipedia, I believe that images of this kind add to the communication value.

The link I placed was to was http://www.flexitimemanager.co.uk/flexi-time-sheet.html. I have accessed this site over many months - ot is a good resource, of value to the voluntary and charitable sectors in the UK.

Please reconsider your delection action, and let me know what you think. My opinion is that we need to stay relaxed but vigilant on the commercial links issue, and not apply guidelines in an overly-rigid fashion.

I would like to reinstate the link.

Best regards

Chris— Dewalnut (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 23:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Seems that link was a part of a multi article Spam campaign for flexitimemanager.co.uk by 193.195.187.106 see WP:SPAM, WP:EL and WP:COI--Hu12 23:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nposs!

It seems my enthusiasm has been misplaced - I signed up to Wikipedia with good intentions, but should have spent more time reading guidelines, I guess. What has been referred to as a "Spam campaign" for flexitimemanager.co.uk was cetainly not intended as such - and I sincerely apologise if I have caused any problems. I spent several hours doing what I hope was good quality updating on some pages relating to timesheets and flexitime in the UK, an area of work I am involved with, and also placed what I thought were some useful links to a free resource in some related pages. I now understand that this was not in line with policy guidelines.

I do think that the response was a little heavy handed - a simple request to me i.e. discussion not arbitrary deletion (and threats of 'blocking' to my employer) could have achieved the same result. I do understand that spamming must cause a lot of hassle, and I regret that I appeared to do that.

Anyway - lets move on. Wikipedia is a great thing, and I hope to be involved with it in future.

I will stay well away from external links to commercial sites in future!!

Perhaps I should just write up a small page on "Flexi Time Manager", because it is a pretty unique resource - tha seems to be an OK thing to do. I see there are quite a few similar pages about interesting (commercial) organisations.

Regards Chris Dewalnut 16:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if you felt overwhelmed by the response. In regards to creating an article about "Flexi Time Manager": although your intentions might be good, I'd say that the article probably would not pass the notability guideliness WP:NOTABILITY. Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information WP:NOT (not to suggest that your program isn't an excellent product and very useful to those who take advantage of it.) Just keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. You can always try to create the article and hope that other editors find the subject to be notable as well. There are places to propose ideas for articles for feedback, but I can't remember off the top of my head. The main help page should direct you to the right source. Let me know if I can be of any help. Nposs 00:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - that's helpful. I am having difficulty understanding the way the various "creation of articles" criteria are applied. If you go to this page, for example List of project management software you can find a whole list of links to pages in Wikipedia that are mostly just short articles about this or that organisation, company etc. For instance, how does the PNMsoft page fit in?

There are many other similar pages. I don't understand how the guidelines you showed me are being applied to these pages - or is it simply that no one has got round to noticing that they are there? Dewalnut 07:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I have to say that it is outside of my area of expertise. There does seem to be precedent for short articles about pieces of software. To be honest I don't know where the line is. You could of course go ahead and create the article and see if it stands (although writing an article about your own product is a pretty serious violation of WP:COI.) You might also ask for a assistance at the Wikipedia:Village pump. Someone there might have better advice for you. Good luck. Nposs 12:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Special education just incase you didn't read the discussion page of it...

Special education is a term used to describe exceptional individuals in a mainstream school. Students attending special schools do not consider themselves exceptional because everyone there is ALL exceptional. How can you call a student in a special school exceptional if every student in special schools is exceptional? In special schools, there are no normal students...so how can you compare between exceptional individuals and normal students? (69.117.20.128 - Talk)

You'll need to support that assertion with a proper reference. Otherwise, it is considered "original research" WP:OR. Also, there is no mention of defining special education students as "exceptional individuals" any where in the literature. It seems like you are making a distinction that is based on your own interpretation of the meaning of words. Nposs 18:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of References to John Coltrane in popular culture

An editor has nominated References to John Coltrane in popular culture, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/References to John Coltrane in popular culture and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 14:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Wedginator

Looks like Wedginator has stopped for now. --Ronz 02:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh well. I've reported a 3RR violation against him, and warned him of another. --Ronz 04:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

External LINK removed...why???

Hi NPoss...

First of all im lost here...I dont know how i got here, and worse, i donno how Ill come back to you to get your answer for my question below...please give me directions.

Second, Thank you for the feedback. i hope i'm not blocked from editing by considering my additions to be SPAM Material..

The problem:

I dont seem to understand why my link was deleted from the x12 > external links.

My goal is not to get my page highly ranked, because it already is highly ranked when the target audience searches google for "x12 conversion". I added my link to your website because two of our important customers asked us:"why dont you have your product listed on wikipedia?!!"...So, the purpose of linking my site is to make my website available among the list of products you have in the external link section.

And upon their request I am doing so...

I have noticed that a product called "stylus studio" is on the list of the external links..and even other software product links.....so, how come they get the privilege to add there link and me NOT!...just wondering..

How can i make our software product available on wikipedia search?..Its not advertising...Its a product in the market that i want our clients to find when they search it up on wikipedia..

Another thing...I am feeling lost a bit here...what is it that i need to know about wikipedia? The main problem, is how do I contact someone to resolve my problem, such as that one...and where do I go to get answers???

please send me an email for a reply to this address: nadrahalabi@hotmail.com becasue im sure i wont be able to track your answer unless its on "my talk"! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nadraabsi (talk • contribs) 09:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC).