User talk:Martinsos

March 2017
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to List of sequence alignment software. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 13:44, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Alexf, thanks for taking a look at my entry at List of sequence alignment software - I added Edlib library. I read the resources that you provided about external links, however I feel like this is a different case: on List of sequence alignment software page, there is a special column for listing a link to library, and every library has it's external link listed there, so I can't see what is inappropriate about my entry regarding the external link? Edlib library has a publication in a serious magazine (Bioinformatics), same as other libraries listed there, and it has recognition on Github, same as some other libraries on the list. I am hoping to understand why you marked my entry as spam and what can we do to fix that. Thanks! Martinsos (talk) 14:42, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Posting a link to your own website or material is a conflict of interest, and using your URL is spam. -- Alexf(talk) 18:39, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah ok, so it is not about external link, it is about the COI. Thanks for the quick answer and link - I believe that adding Edlib to that list is appropriate, but I understand the COI problem. This is my first edit on Wikipedia, so I didn't know about that. I will go with the "request edit", as is suggested on the link you provided. Martinsos (talk) 18:47, 4 March 2017 (UTC)