User talk:Jw21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Regarding Your Claims...

Fellow editors, I, being a long-time editor in Wikipedia, would like to discuss why I am allegedly accused of spamming. The article(s) Creative Zen and Creative Zen Vision:M had the website EpiZENter for a year, and I am not a member, nor an affilate of EpiZENter. The link had been in the article(s) before I contributed to them, and thus I am only doing my part to preserve the article(s) when the site's link is removed.

If it does concern my removal of fansites, which unlike EpiZENter and other related sites, does not provide any content that may be helpful to a researcher collecting information of the product, or an user of the product. That is why I removed those links, but not sites like EpiZENter. I assert that no acts of hypocrisy has been committed. I may apologize for using the caps to demand other editors to stop advertising their own fansites.

If you can learn to realize this misunderstanding, I'd be glad. I have decided to remain EpiZENter's link removed until disputes can be settled.Once again, I apologize for any inconvenience caused. --Jw21 (PenaltyKillah) 01:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Jw21, I felt that if the article is to contain only official links then EpiZENter would not qualify. I understand from the above that this is not the case and that beneficial content for a user of the product is relevant. In this case I would like to understand why the link I added containing unique troubleshooting content is not appropriate. See http://www.fixya.com/support/p214473-creative_labs_zen_touch_20_gb_mp3_player. 217.132.157.198 08:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

(To anonymous user, not Jw21):- You were probably spamming fixya.com there, like you've been spamming it everywhere else- that's why. I've undone all your spam links; read the guidelines for external links before you whine about this. Fourohfour 19:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The articles are for troubleshooting, which is not beneficial for researchers. And the Zen Touch is an end-of-life product. Wikipedia do not wish to use this site as a place for people to find solutions to the defects of their products. Other sites are a muser wiser choice, like Yahoo! Answers or the Creative.com forums (link in the Zen article) For more information, check out Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided. If you can notice it, many pages in sites like EpiZENter has much more in-depth information, specifications, and reviews that is more detailed than the Creative Zen article alone, just like iriver's IriverWiki. --Jw21 aka PenaltyKillah 16:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I quote from your initial post "...does not provide any content that may be helpful to... an user of the product" I think fixya and the likes hold unique and crucial information for the end user. Think of all the people that have problems troubleshooting the Zen, I'm sure many would turn to Wikipedia to learn more about their product. As for researches, although I agree it wouldn't be my first choice, this is a unique way to understand what are the common problems and defects of the product (just like they would in EpiZENter). Forums of Zen are in abundance, it would seem unfair to stick to one. If you see EpiZenter relevant, Fixya should be relevant as well. 84.229.255.26 19:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Notice I typed "end-of-life product". Although Wikipedia does not condone this kind of links, you are free to add the link to the article. After all, this site is a wiki. But please, under a separate sub-heading. How about "User-generated Support"? --Jw21 aka PenaltyKillah 22:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I've learned a lot from this discussion. 89.138.8.1 09:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Yo! You didn't put it under a sub-heading! Never mind, I'll do it myself. Ciao. --Jw21 aka PenaltyKillah 18:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

My bad. Thanks again.80.230.4.101 18:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)