It's not just disorganized (although it is) it's completely devoid of context. The more I look at this article, the worse it appears. 75.53.40.237 ( talk) 22:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC) Reply Ĭritical assessment and a call to action I misclicked when checking, I should have known. Sorry Nevit, I thought from the edit summary you were the one to remove all the external links but it was Aruffo. lenMus is under GNU so it shouldn't a problem. I've added them back including your lenMus and IwasDoingAlright, which is one of the most recommended I've seen in forums of jazz. It's more than clear he's just against any links being there at all. Please read the massive discussion we had under the Promotional Links section, you have to collapse it. I believe he should be blocked for editing this article or section.
#Free ear trainer software free#
I was not aware that he has a conflict of interest with free or open source software. He's should not be able to edit this section. I call conflict of interest with aruffo and lack of disclose he's got competition to his product as part of his incentive.
#Free ear trainer software software#
He sells a nice little retarded software to teach perfect pitch even though he hasn't got perfect pitch. This comes from the butthurt he has from not being able to post his own website everywhere, which he's spammed in the perfect pitch section. We've already established if it has links from several edu sites we can call it notable. The reason no new links are added is Aruffo deletes edits from anyone who tries to add links because he's retarded and thinks computer aided ear training must all be spam and not notable. Before you complained about the commercial bias the mention of freeware was about even with commercial software until someone deleted all the external links and the references they had, you. So as any intelligent person would do you delete all the free useful external links from the article and leave the references to the commercial products. You are actually inserting strong bias toward commercial products and against free products. Please read conversation above, WP:NOT, and WP:LINKS. My previous additions was removed instantly.
It is a free Ear training software which has been translated in 8 languages. I just don't want to go into in an edit war so added a comment here. They remove name of free software but retain promotional material. There are people who guard this page against free software and endorse commercial web sites and commercial products. Doktorspin ( talk) 05:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC) Reply I'm ambivalent about both (because they do provide useful resources) and if you include this particular link I don't think it should be inline. Bests, Languageleon ( talk) 00:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC) Reply Īs much as any link to the Encyclopaedia Britannica you find on Wiki, so I'm sure if you want to remove one, you'll want to remove the other. isn't that just an advertisement? It should be removed from the article. To argue for or against a particular link please use this section from now on.