Jump to content

Talk:RJ TextEd: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Se7h (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
re
Line 6: Line 6:


But wikipedia has a lot of articles about the text editor (PSPad, Notepad, AkelPad and others)? What is this convenient and freeware editor is worse? Is RJ TextEd not entitled to become a well-known (and therefore better because of the emergence of new users) because of Wikipedia? --[[User:Se7h]] ([[User talk:Se7h|talk]]) 15:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
But wikipedia has a lot of articles about the text editor (PSPad, Notepad, AkelPad and others)? What is this convenient and freeware editor is worse? Is RJ TextEd not entitled to become a well-known (and therefore better because of the emergence of new users) because of Wikipedia? --[[User:Se7h]] ([[User talk:Se7h|talk]]) 15:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
:Once again, Wikipedia is not the place to [[WP:SOAPBOX|become more well-known by advertising]], it is only for established concepts that are already well known. --[[User:Fiftytwo thirty|Fiftytwo thirty]] ([[User talk:Fiftytwo thirty|talk]]) 15:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:56, 6 November 2010

Author of RJ TextEd allowed me to create an article on wikipedia proof link - http://www.rjsoftware.se/Forum/viewtopic.php?p=4843&sid=8f1e1883d49e7a028715a97b96154c4f#4843

There is no explicit release of the text under a free license. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a place to advertise or promote a product. --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 15:40, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


But wikipedia has a lot of articles about the text editor (PSPad, Notepad, AkelPad and others)? What is this convenient and freeware editor is worse? Is RJ TextEd not entitled to become a well-known (and therefore better because of the emergence of new users) because of Wikipedia? --User:Se7h (talk) 15:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, Wikipedia is not the place to become more well-known by advertising, it is only for established concepts that are already well known. --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 15:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]