This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
AccessiBe is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles
This page is not unambiguously promotional, there are a few lines that can be re-written and really cant be a reason for deletion. Wikipedia is a collaborative platform that needs editors to help and not just delete the page if it meets notability. I have trimmed the promo content and toned it for neutrality. It has in-depth coverage from sources including WSJ, International Business Times, Forbes, Globes, Fortune, Entrepreneur, TheMarker, and several other high tier news sources. A couple of lines cannot be a reason for deletion but it can be a reason of re-writing. --185.120.124.4 (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was reviewing the article and wanted to explain the reasons for the changes I made. These reasons are mainly the quality of the sources and the nature of the information presented.
Firstly, I want to make it clear that I am not an accessiBe employee, and have never received payment from them to alter the content of this article. While I am a fan of their work and their cause, and since I feel like this article is used as a marketing tool to tarnish the company, I am doing this out of my own volition.
The sources that are presented in the article are haphazard, and it is hard to consider them as credible. Additionally, the way the information from these sources is presented is very specific, and not a full representation of the content on the websites or the market situation. Rather these represent an opinion in an ongoing debate, one I am an eager participant of. I am simply hoping to keep this article balanced and objective, and not a tool to advance specific group interests. Fabiorahamim (talk) 12:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a platform for unsourced editorialising about "an aggressive and cutthroat debate between industry experts" etc. Regardless of whether you are a paid contributor or not, if you persist in making such edits you are liable to be blocked from editing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
