User talk:Judith Rhodes

September 2012

Hello, I'm Mufka. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Nag, because to me it seemed 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. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 09:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mufka, I hope I'm doing this right, it's the first time I've had to use the talk page. You removed my edit to the NAG entry, which gave an additional acronym and a link to the organisation's website. I have no idea why you should think it inappropriate, the organisation is a bona fide training and education organisation, well known in the library world in the UK. I manage the website that I linked to, so I have every right to post that link. Could you please reinstate my edit, or else give me a more detailed reason why you removed it. Thanks Judith Rhodes (talk) 08:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC) Judith Judith Rhodes (talk) 08:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page that you edited is called a disambiguation page. It contains only links to other WIkipedia articles and it helps to point people in the right direction when they search for a name that could refer to many things. Adding links to external web sites is not appropriate for a disambiguation page. You can reply here if necessary, I'll see it. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 09:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right, I get it now. Thanks! So I can create a page for our NAG and link to that, and that would be acceptable? Thanks Judith Rhodes (talk) 09:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)JudithJudith Rhodes (talk) 09:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe but probably not. Your NAG needs to meet notability requirements and you need to be aware of the conflict of interest policy. It's hard to justify writing about anything that you're directly involved with. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 23:13, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I get that, but I can assure you that we are every bit as notable as some of the other acronyms in the list that I tried to add to, and which have their own pages. Seriously, just because you have never heard of us and don't know much about our field, you can't possibly think you're in a position to comment on our notability. We are a significant organisation in the UK. But d'you know what, we probably won't suffer too much from not having a Wikipedia page, and as I am paid to do serious work and not waste my time arguing, we'd better leave it at that. Judith (sorry about the incorrect format signature, can't find a tilde on my laptop keyboard) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.67.221 (talk) 07:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]