Revision as of 15:14, 18 September 2013 edit CorporateM (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 40,012 edits →Question ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:35, 20 September 2013 edit undo AlysonMansfield (talk \| contribs) 23 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 1: ++{\| class="infobox" width="150" \|- align="center" \| [[Image:Vista-file-manager.png\|50px\|Archive]] Line 383: ::::Thanks for the context! I was going to do another study on how many articles show signs of PR editing, but I found most articles showed some of the similar editing habits, even though they probably weren't edited by anyone with a COI. I'll take a look at DriveSavers. [[User:CorporateM\|CorporateM]] ([[User_talk:CorporateM\|Talk]]) 15:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC) ==Official Records of the American Civil War== BusterD, I believe all my links have met the Wikipedia criteria. The links go directly to primary source material. The Cornell U. link has digital images, the Ohio State links on some Civil war sites are for OCR'd text only, and I'm linking to primary source material with both digital images and OCR'd text in one site. This is useful for Civil War researchers. I'm new to Wikipedia editing so I do appreciate your patience and guidance. Thanks for your input.[[User:AlysonMansfield\|AlysonMansfield]] ([[User talk:AlysonMansfield\|talk]]) 02:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC) ==Battle of Ball's Bluff; Chickamauga Campaign; Hatteras Inlet Batteries== BusterD, Again, these links are for primary source material only that is valuable to anyone who wants to research the topic beyond the abbreviated length of a Wikipedia article. "Some acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." And under "What can normally be linked" "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues,[3] amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons." Thanks for your concern.

BusterD