8

One of the key concepts at Wikipedia (and also one of the most controversial) is "notability". Wiki guidelines aim to discourage people using the site as a vehicle for self-promotion, and with good reason, but that can sometimes be over-zealously enforced (as with Donna Strickland, whose Wiki page was deleted as non-notable shortly before she won a ...


4

Anyone, even someone with a conflict of interest, can write a Draft article. It will be reviewed and you need to disclose your connection. It will initially be a stub if it isn't rejected by the editors. But it won't likely become a full article until others add to it and comment. Wikipedia isn't a place for monographs and the editorial process will guard ...


4

If you think the additions are useful, consider adding them. You thought your time well spent building the pages in the first place, so I would think you probably have some interest in improving them. If the changes seem to you marginal, or time consuming, write a polite letter to the proposer reminding them that you don't own the page so they are free to ...


2

I suggest you open a "Talk" page on one or more of your articles and ask the question there. Note that I haven't done this myself and don't know the mechanism, but it is possible. I also suggest you use your conscience as to what would be right and proper. You seem to be suggesting that you think it improper. That is probably the right attitude. ...


1

It is not good practice to have people self-cite in Wikipedia. This may be different in Scholarpedia which has a responsible editor and full disclosure and transparency. So the professors may not want to self-cite. Requesting from you to be cited may be content-wise relevant, but it is self-citation by proxy, so you would be in the right to decline, and it ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible