User talk:2601:192:4A00:430:89C4:ECE6:9F6B:828B

May 2024
Hello, I'm Doniago. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to At the Mountains of Madness have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 15:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I'm rather confused as to exactly what the problem is.
 * I did make a mistake by editing without logging in. I, DWorley, did make that edit and my intention is to always be logged in when editing.
 * But the objection that it "appeared to be promotional" is not clear to me. I see in "At the Mountains of Madness" a link "An edit of the 2010 BBC Radio 7 production of At the Mountains of Madness" and in "The Call of Cthulhu" is (or at least was) a link to the HPLHS video adaptation of that novella.  Looking again, I see in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_the_Mountains_of_Madness#Adaptations this entry
 * "The Mountains of Madness is an audiovisual musical adaptation of the works of H. P. Lovecraft by Tiger Lillies, Danielle de Picciotto and Alexander Hacke."
 * linked to its own Wikipedia page.
 * As a fan of Lovecraft's work, and in the line of the section "Adaptations", it seems reasonable to have a link to the Youtube of the only known "film" adaptation of the novella. (For that matter, as a fan I see the HPLHS DVD of "The Call of Cthulhu" as being a matter of interest, even though it is a commercial product.)  Certainly Wikipedia has no qualms about referencing various books which are commercial products of their publishers.
 * DWorley (talk) 02:18, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You need to provide a secondary source to establish that the adaptation you're trying to add is considered significant in some manner. DonIago (talk) 02:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)