> "kind of dodgy to do without mentioning that you wrote it"
The article is completely neutral, cites reliable sources, has been reviewed by another editor[1], and abides by all Wikipedia policies. I do not personally gain anything from posting it here.
I didn't think the fact that I initially created the article was relevant to this conversation, because for all intents and purposes, it does not make a difference.[2] The article meets Wikipedia's standards, and anyone is free to edit it subject to the applicable content policies.
I see your point, though it still feels a bit dodgy to me, and I suspect to many other HN readers. Fortunately it's a rare and borderline case so we don't need to worry about it too much.
Point taken, I'll be more careful in the future.
> "kind of dodgy to do without mentioning that you wrote it"
The article is completely neutral, cites reliable sources, has been reviewed by another editor[1], and abides by all Wikipedia policies. I do not personally gain anything from posting it here.
I didn't think the fact that I initially created the article was relevant to this conversation, because for all intents and purposes, it does not make a difference.[2] The article meets Wikipedia's standards, and anyone is free to edit it subject to the applicable content policies.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&typ...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership_of_content