User talk:Beaster77

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Cicero 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. Dppowell (talk) 22:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Abraham Lincoln. 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. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Solely adding the same links to the external links section is spamming. Make the case on the individual talk pages rather than assuming they are appropriate. The links contain advertisement, their reliability is uncertain and it does seem to be an action dedicated more towards promoting ejunto than helping wikipedia. Several editors have now removed the links, suggesting they are not appropriate. This is a third warning, upon the fourth you can be blocked. WLU (talk) 00:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have seen librivox on other pages, that means the ejunto link is redundant. Librivox contains no advertising, and is itself apparently notable. You may want to bring this up on WT:EL for more input on this. You may also want to consider actions other than adding just the link, which heavily suggests spamming. I'm also wondering if the content is a copyright violation; if not, a text link may be a better suggestion. WLU (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note. WLU (talk) 01:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks for the information. Will review the guidelines for possible copyright violation. I would contend that ejunto is not redundant alongside a librivox link. Have you ever tried to listen to a librivox recording? Each section is done by a different volunteer with huge variations in quality -- can be very frustrating. Librivox is a great movement, but the ejunto recordings are semi-professional, and the whole book is done by the same reader. Anyway, I'll take it slow and work through the discussion pages. Didn't mean to cause a stir. Beaster77 (talk) 01:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The other question to ask is, what does it add? Does it really help the reader? It may help blind readers who are unable to listen to the text, but they're probably using a text reader anyway (how would they get to ejunto from wikipedia?) Questions like that suggest to me that ejunto gets a lot more from wikipedia than wikipedia gets from ejunto - a huge boost in search engine ratings and attention as wikipedia is usually one of the top search engine results if it has a page. Wikipedia gets a link that is probably redundant to whatever the reader already has. There's no analysis, no information, no research. But these are questions better asked at WT:EL than here. I am of the opinion that there's not much added, but I've always been of the opinion the most important part of WP:EL is the statement "links should be kept to a minimum". P'raps others disagree. WLU (talk) 17:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi there, Beaster77. I believe you when you tell me that you don't have a conflict of interest regarding those links and won't revert if you re-add them, but I'd suggest that you leave the site name out of the link text. That's what made me suspicious, and I think it will make other editors suspicious, too, because it has a whiff of promotion around it. You may also run into resistance from editors who may contest the links' general appropriateness (separate from the question of spam/not-spam) for each article. Good luck! Dppowell (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]