mm_202 wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Now that we finally have a release (a large thank you to everyone that
> was involved and to the community as a whole),
> I think that we should try to get our Wikipedia article back.
>
> We had one for a short time last year, but it was deleted because it
> 'lacked notability'.  One of the things that they kept
> bringing up is that it didnt even have an actual release. [btw, some
> of the largest proponents for deleting it were users
> that maintained the Asterisk Article on Wikipedia, so obviously it was
> very unbiased...]
>
> For the fun little debate:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/CallWeaver
> [and as it saids, please dont modify that page]
>
> Anyways, as I said, I think that its time to get our wiki page back.
> I think that it would greatly increase the awareness
> that there is a better alternative to Asterisk.  I would start the
> page myself, but Im the one that started it last time and
> Im sure that they'll point that out when they try to delete it again.
> Anyone willing to at least start the article?
>
> Also, if anyone has time, the voip-info wiki should be updated as
> well; to at least say that we have a stable release.
>
>
> Again, thank you to everyone who has helped us get this far!
>   
My advice is not to try to get any articles in Wikipedia. Go for 
reputable media instead. Things like Playboy, Hustler, and The National 
Inquirer. You know, things with a lot more credibility than Wikipedia. 
Once they pick it up, Wikipedia will eventually follow.

I would actively campaign to have anything of mine *removed* from 
Wikipedia. Why would I want articles about my work thrown in a cesspit?

Regards,
Steve

_______________________________________________
Callweaver-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.callweaver.org/mailman/listinfo/callweaver-users

Reply via email to