Talk:Jasmine Directory/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Jasmine Directory. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Draft
Hello @DESiegel: as you suggested on your talk page, I will list here another source for evaluation. I have not touched the draft at all. I am not entirely sure if this resource is relevant or not:
1. The AIRS Study
In a publication ("Internet Information Resource Book - Guide to Search Engines, Directories, Online Archives & Database", located at: https://www.slideshare.net/NaveedManzoor/search-engines-guide-20162017) released in October, 2016 by Association of Internet Research Specialists (AIRS) Jasmine Directory, along with DMOZ, Best of the Web Directory and other directories, was described on page 39 as "One of the Top Google Compliant business web directories alive" and they assigned a resource scoring of 5 (on a scale from 1 to 5+). The PDF version of the publication can be downloaded as well, if a user logs in with his LinkedIn account. Their resource scoring system is detailed on page 11 of the publication.
- Notability of the cited source: "AIRS Association is a non-profit professional body registered in the province of Ontario, Canada. AIRS is a self-regulatory Association formed under the Charter of Associations granted by the Government of Canada. (https://www.airsassociation.com/about-airs%7C About AIRS) (cited exactly and credited the source, to avoid any possible copyright issues);
- Author: Naveed Manzoor (BS, MS);
- Title of the publication: "Internet Information Resource Book - Guide to Search Engines, Directories, Online Archives & Database";
- Issued: October, 2016;
- Available online and downloadable at: https://www.slideshare.net/NaveedManzoor/search-engines-guide-20162017;
Now, I don't know if it's advisable or not, or how to rephrase the quoted description.
2. Neutral point of view
In the draft's "Structure" section, the first sentence, "Jasmine's directory is relatively content rich." – this is a subjective point of view, therefore, I think it should be removed.
3. Sidenote
I saw that Jasmine Directory is linked from List of web directories and Web directory.
and more.
Thank you for your time, suggestion and evaluation, DESiegel, have a nice day! Robertgombos (talk) 12:05, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
July 9, 2017: Updated the connected contributor tag (U1-EH = yes) since I started editing the draft. Robertgombos (talk) 00:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello DESiegel, I added several resources, removed a possible subjective statement. May I submit it for review? Robertgombos (talk) 00:47, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure if these citations can prove something or not:
- https://www.theseowhiz.com/10-best-web-directories-for-seo/
- http://www.webconfs.com/how-to-build-backlinks-article-16.php and this old PR
- http://www.prweb.com/releases/webdirectories/jasmine/prweb9809312.htm
- http://www.academia.edu/29517517/Internet_Information_Sourcing_-_Search_Engines_Directories_Online_Archives_and_Database
- http://www.boredpanda.com/top-10-seo-tips-for-link-building/
Trying to get more info on the IRC channel. Robertgombos (talk) 13:17, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
July 12 2017: Submitted AFC after consulting with several editors on the IRC channel.
Note: If any cited source needs translation or image prove, I can provide them.
Removing two statements and the related references as suggested by @Howicus: on the IRC channel. Thank you Howicus. Robertgombos (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Paid editing
New page was created after keeping in mind all Wikipedia guidelines. A tag of "orphan" was placed, so I linked pages to meet the criteria to de-orphan the page. After that, MrOllie suggested more citation which I did. I don't understand the issue of "close connection" as I have nothing to do with the subject. I am just contributing to Wikipedia to utilize my research and to spread it to the world through a wonderful platform. I guess I resolved and addressed the issues for which the tags were placed. HeatherMPinchbeck (talk) 08:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
I verified all the citations and they seem good to me. I removed the tags inasmuch as notability and references issues are solved now. Regarding the notability, Jasmine Directory is one of the highest ranked web directories. I believe an article about it should be kept. And I assure MrOllie I have nothing to do with this directory, just as I think Heather has nothing to do with it. – Alexandru M. (talk · contribs), 9:01, 14 May 2017 (EEST)
Thank you very much, Alexandru. HeatherMPinchbeck (talk) 18:53, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
As I already stated on my user page, I have this Wikipedia account for about 5 years. I have been also an editor at the AOL's DMOZ project, where I edited several categories including the web directory related ones (on curlie.org we are still working on the revival of the work of over 93000 editors). I have never ever tried to create a page for my directory on Wikipedia. I know that people tend to become subjective when it comes to something related to something they own (and I do understand the psychology behind this impulsive behavior), however, during all these years spent on DMOZ I learned and corrected everyday "best, cheapest, awesome services" into "neutral viewpoint".
So, even if I had enough sources for citation, I told myself, frankly, there's no point creating a page because, most likely, it will be deleted; besides, at that time notability was perhaps a concern. In May, in my Google Analytics account, I saw a few visitors originating from Wikipedia. I am not a hypocrite person and I do recon... I was happy that someone considered Jasmine Directory worthy of having an entry on Wikipedia. I haven't done any edits, I even disclosed back than, on my user page that I am the owner of Jasmine Directory.
I saw that some other editors verified the sources, corrected some errors. Than, another editor came an restructured entirely the published page. Than a third editor came and corrected some minor punctuation errors, verified again the sources. If someone wants to compare the initial version of the entry with the current (draft) one it's clear that is drastically different. Obviously, Jasmine Directory, was on my watchlist, I wanted to know if someone would ever post something that is not true.
Yesterday (7/5/2017), I received an e-mail that the page was moved in the draft space because from what I've been reading the user that created the page had some issues regarding Wikipedia general policies.
I never ever paid anyone to create this page nor I have made any edits to the created page.
Therefore, as advised by DESiegel on his talk page on 12:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC), I added the {{UserboxCOI}} tag to my user page and the {{connected contributor}} tag. Robertgombos (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
- The statement "I never ever paid anyone to create this page nor I have made any edits to the created page" appears to be incorrect. An advertisement was placed on Freelancer.com in May, 2017, specifically employing an editor to create this article, and stating so in the advertisement. The editor who was employed was HeatherMPinchbeck, who subsequently created it, and was paid for the work. - Bilby (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Emerald citation
About
- Dirk Lewandowski, ed. (2012). Web Search Engine Research. Library and Information Science. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Pub. doi:10.1108/s1876-0562(2012)4. ISBN 978-1-78052-636-2. ISSN 1876-0562.
I have access to this. there is no page number. jasmine is not in the index. What page or chapter has stuff on Jasmine? Jytdog (talk) 23:24, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Internet Research Methods citation
My university library does not provide access to the following
- Hewson, Claire; Stewart, David W. (2014). "Internet Research Methods". Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: 1. doi:10.1002/9781118445112.stat06720.pub2. ISBN 9781118445112.
{{cite journal}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help)
Can who ever provided this citation, please provide a quote from it, and describe how Jasmine Directory is discussed in this source? I have requested this from ILL but it will take a while. Jytdog (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, thanks for further reviewing and cleaning the article. Much appreciated. The ref name="emeraldinsight" is orphan, probably it should be removed. I also submitted a {{request edit}} about an hour ago I'd really appreciate if you could take a look. Thanks! Robertgombos (talk) 23:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- can you answer the question above or not? Thanks Jytdog (talk) 23:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- I never added these references since I do not have access to them. I've just checked Google Books for the term "jasminedirectory" and both Web Search Engine Research and Internet Research Methods show up but with that many blanked pages I really can't tell. Here [1] is a mention but it's trivial. Robertgombos (talk) 23:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, found a clue, via Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Jasmine+Directory%22 "Other web directories include Galaxy (http://www.Galaxy.com), Best of the Web (botw.org), Jasmine Directory (jasminedirectory.com) of business-related sites, and Ezilon.com (ezilon.com). Directories are especially …" ~ this is all I have access to.Robertgombos (talk) 23:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. If that is all there is , it doesn't count toward N or have anything encyclopedic to summarize. Jytdog (talk) 23:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, glad I could help. The article from the Daily News Egypt (https://dailynewsegypt.com/2018/05/12/do-web-directories-still-work-for-marketing-in-2018/) and The London Economic (www.thelondoneconomic.com/tech-auto/how-to-supercharge-your-online-business-using-local-and-business-directories/10/05/) seem more N oriented. And probably some of the refs suggested for review. Could you take a look if you're into cleaning/fixing? TY. Robertgombos (talk) 00:05, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, I purchased the paper because I was curious as well, and here's the exact quote (pp. 2-3/6) "Much of the secondary research that takes place on the Internet involves the use of tools, such as web directories and search engines, to identify secondary sources of information. Directories are lists of resources arranged by subject that have been created for the specific purpose of organizing information content. Much like the table of contents of a book, a directory provides a list of topics contained within a data source. Claiming to be the largest human-edited directory of the World Wide Web, DMOZ (dmoz.org) is maintained and developed by a community of volunteer editors and can be accessed and used for free. Other web directories include Galaxy (http://www.Galaxy.com), Best of the Web (botw.org), Jasmine Directory (jasminedirectory.com) of business-related sites, and Ezilon.com (ezilon.com). Directories are especially useful research tools when the researcher has identified a general area of interest and wishes to take advantage of the organizational structure provided by a directory. In addition, use of a directory narrows the content, and that can make finding information more efficient.". Cheers! Robertgombos (talk) 11:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. yep that is the definition of "passing mention". Jytdog (talk) 13:45, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, I purchased the paper because I was curious as well, and here's the exact quote (pp. 2-3/6) "Much of the secondary research that takes place on the Internet involves the use of tools, such as web directories and search engines, to identify secondary sources of information. Directories are lists of resources arranged by subject that have been created for the specific purpose of organizing information content. Much like the table of contents of a book, a directory provides a list of topics contained within a data source. Claiming to be the largest human-edited directory of the World Wide Web, DMOZ (dmoz.org) is maintained and developed by a community of volunteer editors and can be accessed and used for free. Other web directories include Galaxy (http://www.Galaxy.com), Best of the Web (botw.org), Jasmine Directory (jasminedirectory.com) of business-related sites, and Ezilon.com (ezilon.com). Directories are especially useful research tools when the researcher has identified a general area of interest and wishes to take advantage of the organizational structure provided by a directory. In addition, use of a directory narrows the content, and that can make finding information more efficient.". Cheers! Robertgombos (talk) 11:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, glad I could help. The article from the Daily News Egypt (https://dailynewsegypt.com/2018/05/12/do-web-directories-still-work-for-marketing-in-2018/) and The London Economic (www.thelondoneconomic.com/tech-auto/how-to-supercharge-your-online-business-using-local-and-business-directories/10/05/) seem more N oriented. And probably some of the refs suggested for review. Could you take a look if you're into cleaning/fixing? TY. Robertgombos (talk) 00:05, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. If that is all there is , it doesn't count toward N or have anything encyclopedic to summarize. Jytdog (talk) 23:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Jytdog, found a clue, via Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Jasmine+Directory%22 "Other web directories include Galaxy (http://www.Galaxy.com), Best of the Web (botw.org), Jasmine Directory (jasminedirectory.com) of business-related sites, and Ezilon.com (ezilon.com). Directories are especially …" ~ this is all I have access to.Robertgombos (talk) 23:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- I never added these references since I do not have access to them. I've just checked Google Books for the term "jasminedirectory" and both Web Search Engine Research and Internet Research Methods show up but with that many blanked pages I really can't tell. Here [1] is a mention but it's trivial. Robertgombos (talk) 23:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- can you answer the question above or not? Thanks Jytdog (talk) 23:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)