Is there a difference between an article you paid someone to write about you and one that was written without your involvement? Yes. There is.
Would this article have existed at all had he not paid for it? Possible, but doubtful.
Wikipedia is not editorial journalism, it is an encyclopedia. His inclusion in said encyclopedia was paid sponsorship. An ad. Wikipedia’s policies don’t require it to be said on the page itself, which is a shame, because knowing whether the subject of an article paid for it to exist does change the reader’s perception of the article. It absolutely does.
“Nobody would have believed what he was saying without those patents.”
Exactly. He used his patents from Apple to convince people of his supposed credibility or notability in order to get people to believe he was good at this. But that’s not what patents are. They’re so companies can use their employees’ contributions as legal arsenal. They do not signal competency or skill.
I’m a little surprised along this entire journey, no one reported that Imran Chaudhri paid to have a Wikipedia article written about him and his many patents to bolster his reputation years before Humane became relevant.
It’s a little funny that the reason you wrote your own was because you found mine to be flawed, only to find out there were flaws in your own that might swing the whole conclusion you were hoping for!
You could, if you wanted to, add 13.47 million sales of 3D World to your chart. That might change some numbers, but not in your favor.
“As of March 2024, Bowser's Fury has sold 13.47 million units worldwide in association with the Switch version of 3D World, making it one of the best-selling games on the console.”
Super Mario World has a green M. (multicolor Super)
Super Mario Ball has a red M. (yellow Super)
Super Mario 3D World and Land have a red M. (multicolor Super)
Super Mario Odyssey has a red M. (white Super)
Super Mario 64 has a blue M. (multicolor Super)
Super Mario Galaxy and 2 have a blue M. (white Super)
It’s been a conscious effort to reduce the amount of obligations in my life, and I’m proud to have free time to spend any way I want to, even if someone else might consider it a trivial waste of time.
It’s true! Though a multicolor logo for the Super Mario Bros. 3 title screen does appear on the SNES and GBA (Super Mario Advance) version, which is super fun but I didn’t include it because it wasn’t on the box art that way.
The goal was to determine what colors are chosen for a “random” appearance. A (Mario Party) logo that arranges the colors chromatically may include more than just 6 or 7 colors, thereby having two greens, and it becomes confusing to where you draw the line on what color each is defined as. This “arbitrary rule” is kinda related to not including logos that are one color, because similarly including that data would affect determining what the ideal “random” appearance would be. Chromatic or single color do not appear random.
Is there a difference between an article you paid someone to write about you and one that was written without your involvement? Yes. There is.
Would this article have existed at all had he not paid for it? Possible, but doubtful.
Wikipedia is not editorial journalism, it is an encyclopedia. His inclusion in said encyclopedia was paid sponsorship. An ad. Wikipedia’s policies don’t require it to be said on the page itself, which is a shame, because knowing whether the subject of an article paid for it to exist does change the reader’s perception of the article. It absolutely does.