0

The question and it's associated answer:

How can I find a compact camera with an ultra-wide lens?

This was recently opened and answered by a very prominent and respected member of this community. It asks what I see as a very valid general question about finding a specific camera model. The answer addresses this by directing the user to specific resources on an external website, and also gives a bit of context to help in using that website.

This is where I think the crux comes in. The answer reads very much like an advertisement for a specific website. That specific website is run by another very prominent and respected member of this community.

This question may come off as derogatory, but I am really at a loss as to why the answer needs to read so much like an advertisement.

14
  • I'm totally unrelated to the other website. I just like it. I don't even know @Itai except through here. I recommend this web site too, for what it is good for. I'm not sure of a way to make the recommendation read less "like an advertisement" and still be short and helpful, which I wanted this to be, because the goal is to have a landing target for the not-infrequent requests we get for such a camera. – mattdm Apr 23 '13 at 2:43
  • This specifically is what I think makes it sound like an advertisement "Yes! The Neocamera camera database, regularly updated with new models, has a convenient search which will show just this.". The only thing missing from the advertisement is saying, "get it now, supplies are limited, only $19.95!". I also think that dismissing the competition as "unwieldy" is a great marketing tactic, as no one really knows what unwieldy is or why you find it that way. – dpollitt Apr 23 '13 at 2:46
  • Okay, I can expand on unwieldy, and I can soften the opening. Honestly, I think you're a bit testy because I wrote this in response to your question asking for an ultra-wide compact camera. – mattdm Apr 23 '13 at 2:48
  • If you did those to things I would be much more forgiving. Opening any question with "YES!" is a bad idea in my mind if you want to come off as objective. Yes, my question sucked, and no I'm not testy because you taught me something! I only come here to learn as I'm well aware I don't know it all! – dpollitt Apr 23 '13 at 2:50
  • Hmm... Tricky. I kind of read it the same way too. It's a bit like a commercial that says "How do you get whites so white in your laundry?" answer: "You use the fantabulous Uberbright Laundry detergent to do it!" Having said that, it's also does help to answer a real question that comes up and Matt did disclose the connections. The information is useful, Itai's site is excellent, so some phrasing adjustments will help. Disclaimer: my better half is a professional writer in the advertising industry... – John Cavan Apr 23 '13 at 2:52
  • Okay, edited? That better? I'm not really testy either. Although I should go to sleep as I have a long day tomorrow. :) – mattdm Apr 23 '13 at 2:54
  • Note, disclosure alone does not keep it on topic. I know matt is not affiliated. Just a reference - stackoverflow.com/faq#promotion – dpollitt Apr 23 '13 at 2:55
  • @mattdm - Better from my view. dpollitt - Agreed, but I think we can give some elbow room to strong participants when interpreting that. Within reason, of course, it does have to have value to the community. – John Cavan Apr 23 '13 at 2:57
  • Grr... system wouldn't let me do more than one 'at' reference. :p – John Cavan Apr 23 '13 at 2:57
  • Yes, I do think the edit makes it substantially better. I'm still wondering if we need a question on the site generalizing each spec and where it can be found, when we have this already: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/1570/… – dpollitt Apr 23 '13 at 2:58
  • Well, you know I'd like to close every camera recommendation question as a duplicate of that one, but I don't think everyone agrees with me, so I see this as a sort of middle ground about a specific feature search. (And it happens that, for example, Snapsort might be a general recommendation but isn't good for this particular thing.) – mattdm Apr 23 '13 at 2:59
  • 1
    Snapsort is a POS, whatever you do, just don't recommend that! Ok your middle ground may be a good idea. I see your theory now. – dpollitt Apr 23 '13 at 3:00
  • Well, a duplicate closure without delete keeps it around for search engines. Merges can also be used to tie them together. You know, we could be doing this better in chat... – John Cavan Apr 23 '13 at 3:01
  • 1
    Sorry, this does not add anything constructive, but, having done numerous google searches recently for camera review sites, I have noticed that Neocamera does not come up if I don't write the name myself in the search line, and even when I write it - Google thinks I made a spelling mistake and shows red underlining the word. So without a modest advertising a good site might go unnoticed. – Esa Paulasto Apr 23 '13 at 6:44
1

The original poster made some modifications to the original wording. All looks good now.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .