Hello, I'm Praxidicae. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to List of data recovery companies have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Praxidicae, I am the user at the IP address. Our submission is in full compliance with Wikipedia rules. The list itself may not qualify as an authentic article, and may need to be taken down - however, within the exact rules you referenced for me is this; "External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify notable organizations which are the topic of the article." - I made no alternative or extra notations which would qualify this as a "soapbox" or an "advertisement" - I updated the list to reflect accuracy within the rules as stated on Wikipedia. Do note, that before my own addition, this list contained multiple other external links and was unaltered for months. I at least took the time to properly format the page by reformatting it such that external links were at the bottom of the page (again, as specified in the Wikipedia article on external links and lists). I appreciate your commitment to a fair, clean, and unbiased Wikipedia - however, I disagree with your conclusion that a commercial organization *must* have an article in order to be on a "List of businesses with X service" - there are multiple Wiki sources indicating that is NOT the case - going so far as to expressly describe proper usage of external links in this context. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davoguha (talk • contribs) 15:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC) Davoguha (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not in full compliance with Wikipedia rules. We aren't interested in your spam. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? I tried to update an article to reflect better accuracy, and did so with extreme diligence to the rules. My apologies if I seem to have missed something - but even the rule you cited has the exact reference for external linking which I followed. To what spam do you refer? Could I ask you to help make this list accurate? Thank you. Davoguha (talk) 16:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look, your site and product aren't notable, it isn't going to be accepted, so you can continue to waste your time arguing with experienced editors or go do something more useful with your time. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of companies and organizations - A company or organization may be included in a list of companies or organizations whether or not it meets the Wikipedia notability requirement, unless a given list specifically requires this. If the company or organization does not have an existing article in Wikipedia, a citation to an independent, reliable source should be provided to establish its membership in the list's group. - Is this incorrect? It is directly from wiki/Wikipedia:CSC Davoguha (talk) 16:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the followup - I just wanted to inform you that I opened a talk on the page in question, in hopes of resolving our disagreement. I would appreciate your perspective on the thread, and will await the feedback of others as well, before seeking dispute resolution. No hard feelings at all - I simply don't agree with your interpretation of the rules on this, and it feels very biased to only allow companies who have "wikipedia" pages to be a part of this list. Here is the talk I started; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_data_recovery_companies Davoguha (talk) 17:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]