User talk:Matt Challacombe

April 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page FreeON has been reverted.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b (links: http://electronicstructure.blogspot.com/). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 23:46, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Please note the above and do not relink to your blog. I would also say that the last edit replacing "O(N)" by linear scaling is much clearer to the general reader. Please leave that in place. Also remember that you have a conflict of interest and be careful about your edits. If in doubt, make suggestions on this talk page and we will help you. I write quantum chemistry codes also. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  22:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

You asked me a couple of questions on my talk page and I thought it best to break my usual habit of replying there and reply here where there is already some discussion above on these matters. First, the conflict of interest tag. It is there because almost all of the contributions to the FreeON article are from you and your collaborators. They are not independent of the subject. You clearly have a conflict of interest and the tag is there simply to remind the reader that the article is written by people who have an interest in the subject of the article. It is not a criticism of you and your collaborators. You have done a reasonable job in writing the article. However, the tag should stay until other editors have made significant contributions to the article. Second, the question of blogs and reliable sources. People are not reliable sources. What they write may be. When you write a scientific paper, that is a reliable source. When you write on a blog, that is not a reliable source. Do not link to blogs. If the blog you refer to is actually a web site that only you edit, then it may be OK to refer to it. If anybody can edit it, you certainly can not link to it. However it would be best to link only to the FreeON home page and link to your discussion pages or even blogs there. I see no reason to link to the author web pages and indeed I would remove the list of developers and have it on the FreeON home page. Email addresses are not appropriate. You also have far too many references to scientific papers. You should really just link to papers that are directly about the software as sources for what is in the article. References should be inline citations, to support specific points in the article. Let me sum it all up in this way: we are writing an encyclopedia, so we want to give reliable sourced information in a neutral way to the readers. You say 'we don't want to "over advertise", but would like to use wiki to establish a reference for our small community of experts.'. You have it all wrong. It is not about advertising in any way, or providing a reference for your community. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  22:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)