WikiPersonality

AboutUs.org

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article AboutUs.org may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. On Wikipedia, all users are entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects. -WarthogDemon 18:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank your for reviewing the new article. Please do a google search to confirm the following pouplarity of what may be one of the most popular new open directories. With wiki-style openness- it is a sudden six month success.

Google Search: for AboutUs.org "Personalized Results 1 - 10 of about 1,440,000 for aboutus.org. (0.18 seconds"

The great thing about Wikipedia is that it can respond immediatly to new information. Unlike paper encylclopedias, Wiki can be real time if needed. Based on the listing of AboutUs.org in some of the most prominent Whois look up sites, and the number of Google inquiries, I am surprised it was not here earlier. I don't think any other spellings exist for it as it is specifically a website.

Please do a search and you will be surprised.

Thanks--WikiPersonality 18:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Please understand that Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest --orlady 19:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

What is she talking about? I am not AboutUs.org! II am a thankful vistor to the site and encourage people to use open sites.. Based on non responsive editors at DMOZ, it is simply a popular new Wiki Style / open editing direcory!

Orlady - I will give you a piece of New York advise: "Please read". Please read the request that relevance be determined by doing a google query, and reading significant articles on the topic!

I reccomend all articles not yet understood be "googled" before wrong comments, or speedy deletions are requested. Otherwise you will embarrass yourself as being only willing to comment on old topics and subject matter.

• Hello, WikiPersonality (the page history indicates that you are the author of the above unsigned comment.) I regret my confusion regarding your affiliation with Aboutus -- the fact that you had written entries on your own page titled "aboutus" is confusing. ;-) I think that you will find the recently concluded discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/web directories informative regarding Wikipedia's criteria for determining whether a web resource deserves its own article. --orlady 20:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello... and Thank you for clarifying. An abrupt comment can be especially harsh to someone trying to make a contribution. The key to this article is that it is similar to what Wiki was to the existing encyclopedias. Similarly DMOZ has been the subject of controversy, by allowing editors to monopolize a catagory (possibly one in which they have self interest) and then not reply to directory inclusion requests, even on highly popluar websites. It has alway irked me that DMOZ is called the open directory, when it is truly the most horrendous experience trying to list or read up on policies. In certain discussion forums, would be submitters of a listing are sheepishly pleading with the editors to consider listings over a year waiting without reply. All under the belief if they are not meek they will never be listed. Meanwhile there is a chance that many have editors either too overwhelmed to edit, or editors with self interest ignoring all but impossible huge conglomerates. Hence my profound appreciation for AboutUs.org when first noticed on Whois.sc or commonly now DomainTools.com

My joy at writing the article is that it suprised me greatly it had not yet been written about, and is hotly contested on Netscape blogs.. etc... (Which now owns DMOZ). It seems as if it finally happened.. a truly open directory. With a ton of controversy! LOL--WikiPersonality 20:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)