User talk:PackagingMyself


 * }

Your edits
Hello, PackagingMyself. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Hello, I'm Beetstra. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you.



Please stop promoting these websites. Blogspots do not count as reliable sources, and certainly not more than other sources. It did come to my attention that, despite having completely different subjects, the two websites are closely related. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

From Packaging Myself: I am sorry that you felt my edits were promoting something. I was adding legit info about the museum's recent reopening, and I did cite my own blog posting as a source. Perhaps I should have linked directly to the museum's own pages?

I do not know why my site prices.com shows up. I have not knowingly added any link to that site.

I support the Wikipedia mission whole heartedly, but I did not realize that you consider blog postings as something other than a reliable source. Thanks for your alert.PackagingMyself (talk) 18:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Blogs are very limited as a reliable source (though sometimes fine), but here there was already another references so ...
 * Regarding promotional, I was talking about the links to theprices.com from your earlier edits: diff.
 * Please have a look through the policies and guidelines I linked above, they'll give some guidance I hope. Thanks!  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 19:44, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I think I see what you mean. I had forgotten about editing the article on outlining. The link does go to my site. But the text there is a reproduction of content from my book, Outlining Goes Electronic: A Study of the Impact of Media on our Understanding of the Role of Outlining in Virtual and Collaborative Conversations. ATTW Series, Ablex., 1999. At the time, I did not realize that you needed a link to the original scholarly book, not a web page containing the same content.

I appreciate the work you are doing to keep Wikipedia reliable, and I apologize for violating standards that I now understand much better, thanks to your notice.PackagingMyself (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=616709675 your edit] to Bill Etra may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:42, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * *Price, Jonathan, 'Video Visions: a Medium Discovers Itself' New American Library, New York, 1977, ASIN: B00ECDT4V2

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=617908047 your edit] to Bill Etra may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 ""s and 1 "[]"s and  1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page]. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)