Web of Trust Forum

<quote user="site-rater">... The "WOT_Services" page is semi-protected, but the POV content in the headline is still standing.

Also, perhaps someone could fill in the blanks regarding WOT Firefox for instance? Perhaps they could cite the forum? https://www.mywot.com/en/forum/76764-community-update-wot-is-back-on-firefox As the post is signed by an "Admin" account it should stand up to Wikipedia's standards.[/quote]

Hello, Site-rater. I will try to remove the POV content in the headline, but there's no guarantee it won't be reverted by other Wikipedia editors such as the ones who behaved so poorly toward OP redblade7.

Good idea, about mentioning the re-inclusion of WOT for Firefox! I can do that, and THAT will not be reverted! I will cite the entry by Mozilla itself hxxp://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/wot-safe-browsing-tool/ Wikipedia does not accept forum posts as sources of information, regardless of whether or not an Admin account was the author. That's okay, as Mozilla itself (although a primary source) is sufficient. Media coverage of WOT being reinstated in the Mozilla add-on "store" would be great, as Wikipedia prefers secondary or tertiary sources of information.

If anyone happens to notice any coverage in technology or consumer Internet publications online, about WOT being made available for Firefox browser again, please post the URL here so I can cite it in the Wikipedia article too.

I re-wrote the WOT article in Wikipedia, to indicate that the add-on had been reinstated in browser add-on stores. I revised the first two paragraphs so that they would be in the present tense. I also cleaned up the article for grammar and repetitive mentions of the sale of user data to third-parties. This is the current version hxxps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WOT_Services&oldid=787641315

There is no guarantee that my changes will remain as they are now, but we'll just need to wait and see.

Things have worked out as I was afraid they would. In less than 24 hours after I made my edits to the WOT article in Wikipedia, large sections of the original article (pre-2016!) were removed because they were supposedly unsourced, see here
hxxps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WOT_Services&type=revision&diff=787702128&oldid=787641315
It sure seems like this is vindictive behavior on the part of Wikipedia editors! The particular editor who made the change is familiar to me by name. He is an old-timer, so it wouldn't do any good for me (and especially, me as a woman) to try to argue against his changes. I have been editing Wikipedia since 2011, but I am not part of the sysop, admin, bureaucrat cabal, so I am relatively powerless.

I'm sorry. I tried. I will return to the Wikipedia article about WOT in a few weeks or months. I will make multiple, incremental edits. That is what I have found to work best rather than confrontation. It is very frustrating.

All of you in the WOT forum who said this was a futile effort have been proven correct.