User talk:Allen Info

This user may have left Wikipedia. Allen Info has not edited Wikipedia since 22 December 2008. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Hello - so that you know it, adding links to many articles constitutes WP:SPAM. Also if you are connected to the site you are adding, please see WP:COI and WP:EL. Wikipedia is not a directory of links and your additions will likely be removed. Cheers Geologyguy 13:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. BusterD (talk) 20:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Siege of Vicksburg. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. BusterD (talk) 13:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Battle of Yorktown (1862). It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. BusterD (talk) 13:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Battle of Stones River, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well potentially being penalized by search engines. BusterD (talk) 13:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider editing Wikipedia without adding links to a personal website

If you're the fellow who runs the personal journeys website, then you likely have much to offer our community in many ways and in multiple fields of expertise. For example, if the photographs on the site are taken by you, perhaps you might consider submitting some of the best of these under GNU Free Documentation License, allowing others to use your wonderful eye to help illustrate project articles. I hate to see a potential contributor find him or herself unable to participate because of a basic misunderstanding of what we're trying to accomplish here. Please consider reading some of the welcome page so you can find ways of joining our community of interested volunteers. BusterD (talk) 13:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge receiving your email, but if you don't mind I'll reply here. One of the basic understandings each of us accepts when we edit a page is that what we add to a page no longer is under our control or our permission. When I write a passage and hit Save page, that work is offered up beyond myself. If I upload a picture to Commons, anyone can use it later for any purpose. Here's a picture I uploaded: Image:CPR technicians working.jpg, a digital photograph of computer repair shop I visited several years ago. Since I took the photo myself, and the image doesn't need model release, I added the image and used it on the Computer repair technician article.

My point is that our collective agreement (such is the social construct we've joined) doesn't allow me to use the pedia to advertise my own personal website where I display such images; it requires I submit them for everybody's use. After all, I've still got my copy, and my rights are protected by the GFDL. I don't suggest you'd want to submit all of your photos, but contributing some might be one way of contributing to wikiprojects.

There are so many ways a person can make contributions. One can copy-edit existing pages, improve stub articles which deserve development (always a good place for a new contributor to make a big difference), watch pages for vandalism. I happen to know of one ACW battle page at this moment which really needs a good photo of the existing terrain: here's a discussion about Braxton Bragg's trenches on Missionary Ridge. While the discussion doesn't hinge on current views of terrain, having a photo in commons might help to settle the issue (as would good citation).

And your enjoyment of the study of history and re-enactment isn't the only area of content where your knowledge might help the pedia. If I understand your website, you've some experience in the energy industry. I'm sure the pedia has projects and portals in this area. I know the American Civil War task force will have links to articles of interest.

In any case welcome to Wikipedia, and don't let this initial misunderstanding prevent you from learning more about how this process works. A fresh set of eyes is often the most valuable single asset a new contributor brings to the pedia. BusterD (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your second email, I'm sorry if you felt my comments posted above came across as hostile; such was not my attention. I agree your edits were made in good faith, which is one reason I waited one day after my first warning before applying more harsh standard warnings. I don't make the rules about what is considered acceptable for page content; I did apply community-worded warnings and then posted a more personal note, which is why we're talking now (and thank you for your candid responses.)

Lots of people have had the same idea you had: people would like access to my material. Unfortunately there are some unscrupulous folks out there who'd use Wikipedia's visibility to help get their personal website additional attention. So the community has developed rules about what is called "linkspam", adding links to personal sites. I was not the only user to notice your insertions. This brief discussion at the American Civil War task force talk page confirmed my decision to act.

You are correct that part of the issue with your insertion was the conflict of interest between your decision to insert the links and the possible benefit to you if traffic on your personal site jumped. You appeared to act in your own personal interest, and that's not allowed.

Please don't confuse "original content" with "original research." When a wiki-editor is writing an article, the words are the editor's own unless the repeated or quoted words are identified in text as quoted and properly cited. However, the assertions made in the normal course of writing original text must be defended with citation agreeing with said assertions; no original synthesis or analysis is allowed. Likewise, all images submitted must be the original non-derivative work of the submitter. One couldn't take a photograph of a Jackson Pollock painting and then submit the work under GDFL.

It's amazing how much of one's work sticks. I'm aware of an article stub I started almost three years ago which has now been fleshed out pretty well by others. I'm very proud of it. The only part of the article still in my words is the two-sentence introduction, which is exactly the way I worded it when I first posted it. I'm aware of another article which I built with a wiki-friend which really needed no additional work until this year, when my friend decided to build it up even more. Don't let the somewhat impermanent and ephemeral character of the pedia deceive you. We're not attempting to tell the only truth here. It's much more like we're staging public debate to move our collective understandings ever closer to truth. Sorry for sounding preachy. BusterD (talk) 23:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BusterD: Sorry to be testy. I added my apology to the American Civil War talk page. However, I remain confused about how I might share pictures and other information. I will try to read the welcome information that you suggested. Allen Info (talk) 20:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, don't worry about it. You've clearly got valuable content to contribute, so I'd hate to lose you as an editor on account of having been once bitten for your past, good-faith edits. If you need any assistance with anything, including those photograph uploads, I'd be happy to help. They're probably more appropriate on Wikimedia Commons (the Foundation's repository of public-domain and creative commons media) than Wikipedia itself, but I'm active on that project (same username) and can help there as well. Just drop a note on my talkpage if you need anything. Ford MF (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! (We can't say that loud/big enough!)

Hello, Allen Info, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

BusterD (talk) 00:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]