Jump to content

User talk:Dan1679/Archive002

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

== removed linkin park link page ==

Wikipedia is not allowing me to register a screen name. It freezes every time i try.

You removed my link to a page that contained a full radio discography of linkin park with samples, complaining that it was a commercial site. Linkin park is a commercial entity. All the other links are commercial. There is nothing for sale at the site I put up. It contains good, scholarly information that is not available in wikipedia. Did you even look at the page linked?

Please put my link back up so linkin park fans like myself can get to it.

Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.97.9 (talk • contribs) 11 May 2006.

:In response to your post on my talk page, I removed the links you added because they were spammed across multiple pages. Wikipedia is in need of more content, not more external links. Please see WP:SPAM for guidelines as to what's considered spam here at Wikipedia. Thanks --AbsolutDan (talk) 00:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

::I sent you a message to explain why the link I posted was not spam. You completely ignored what I said and responded by removing the other post post I made that same day.

::This seems like vengeance to me. Are you going to continue following me around because I legitimately protested your spam accusations? You don't like to be questioned?

::There is nothing scholarly about vengeance.

::And you were less than honest too. You said I "spammed across multiple pages." I only put up one link. The other link was already there. I edited it. There is nothing "multiple" about that.

::I have been participating in posting on wikipedia, putting up content and providing good links, for well over a year. Do you have my entire history available?

::I see that you have lots of complaints about your overzealous reversions.

::Be more careful. Read the posting and reversion rules please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.97.9 (talk • contribs) 12 May 2006.

::Also, I complained that I could not get a screen name. You apparently did not consider that issue important enough to bother to offer me any kind of assistance. You did not even acknowledge it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.97.9 (talk • contribs) 12 May 2006.

:::First of all, and most importantly, all of the complaints about link removal on my talk page are from the users whose links I removed. Of course they're going to be a little upset - it was their edit that I removed. This does not necessarily indicate my removals were in error.

:::Next, I didn't ignore your comments. I take every comment left on my page seriously and try to respond to every comment. I did leave a response on your talk page. For your convenience, I will be combining the entire conversation and posting it both on your talk page and mine.

:::Although technically your IP's history only shows you adding the link to one article, you did make modifications to the same link, and on the same articles, as another account - Tunecaster. See Special:Contributions/69.117.97.9 and Special:Contributions/Tunecaster. Perhaps it's just coincidence, but this looks suspiciously like 69.117.97.9 and Tunecaster are one in the same.

:::Speaking of history, your IP only shows edits from the last few days. When spam-removers such as myself are determining whether to remove links we often check users' history. The fact that your IP only shows a history of adding or making changes to links to one particular website makes your edits look like spamming. If you want your edits to carry more weight, and thus have less of any external links you add being removed, I highly recommend creating an account. By doing so, editors can review your entire history, which can help determine your motivation behind adding a link.

:::Lastly (but also importantly), please sign your comments. It's important to do this so that someone viewing a talk page can determine who made which comment.

:::In closing, I refer you to the following guidelines regarding external links and spamming. Please check them out before adding additional external links, as they discuss the types of links that are appropriate in Wikipedia articles, and also reasons why an editor can appear to be a spammer. :::*WP:EL :::*WP:SPAM :::I'll be posting a follow-up on your talk page regarding your account creation issues --AbsolutDan (talk) 04:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]

The contributor took down this section, as it is no longer relevant. Thank you Dan. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.117.97.9 (talk • contribs) 22 May 2006.

Note: The contributor originally removed the conversation. I am restoring it, as (from what I recall from guidelines) it's best to keep all conversation records intact. However, I respect the contributor's wishes to strike this conversation, so I have gone through and <s>'d it --AbsolutDan (talk) 02:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]


Gerald Massey website

Our members report that you've applied a global 'delete' to the various external links to the Gerald Massey website that we have added to various Wikipedia pages in an effort to enhance the often 'skeletal' information that they currently provide.

For example, the Wikipedia entry for the minor Victorian poet, Adelaide Anne Procter, contains little about her life and no examples of her verse. The link to the Gerald Massey site (now deleted) led a comprehensive biography and to all her published verse - and the same applies to about a dozen similar poets of that age that you catalogue on Wikipedia. (I notice that you recently posted correspondence on this page to this effect from someone else regarding your deletion of the external link we had posted to the entry on our site for the Scots poet/writer, Hugh Miller).

I really think that before you an delete external link, you ought to take a look at what lies at the end of it and assess how that material adds useful information to what your excellent facility already provides. And while you might disagree, I do not regard anything offered on my Society's site - to be taken or left as the visitor sees fit - as SPAM, as your notice to my IP address suggests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.33.196 (talk • contribs) 13 May 2006

In response to your message on my Talk page, I removed the links you added to the www.gerald-massey.org.uk website because they were added "bare". Please consider adding content instead of just links. If you add content that gerald-massey.org.uk can be a source for, then add the link as a citation. Please refer to WP:SPAM#How_not_to_be_a_spammer, particularly points 1 and 2. Thanks --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Knight

hi absolutdan!

thanks for informing me. i didn´t think i was adding commercial information to that page; rather giving people a chance where to *see* more information about that guy. i have no affiliation with the website i linked to whatsoever, except that i read it regularly. i´ll get more informed about wikifying now. regards, faleRA —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FaleRa (talk • contribs) 06:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Phil Knight v Michael Moore

hi dan, its me again. just wanted to point out to you that i added the same link, along with info on his appearance in the very same documentation movie, on the page on michael moore. does that make it commercial info too? best, FaleRa —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FaleRa (talk • contribs) 06:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't micro-manage!

If an external link is for a neologism, then as you know it cannot be added to Wiki. Therefore it must be added as an external link. --panem

The link I removed was to a personal website, which (as you mention above) contains original research. Wikipedia isn't the place for original research, whether it be in the article content or external links. If we started adding links to all the political theories and such we'd quickly have a bottom-heavy article --AbsolutDan (talk) 00:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Reminder...

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 02:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reminders are not to bother frequent contributors, but to inform new(er) users who are unaware of the subst: tag. I only remind users once about subst:ing. Thank you for your note at my talk page, and if you have any further comments, please take them to my talk page. Happy editing! — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 03:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Flehmen response

Hello,

The link i have been removing breaks the Wiki rule that states sites thats primary purpose is to sell goods or services whitch the site clearly is even if it has content about flehmen response please read the rules before changing my edits.

Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dogtoyco (talk • contribs) 19 May 2006.

The link in question wasn't quite so cut-and-dry. The link was a citation, not just a normal external link. The page it linked to does provide information relevent to the topic. It was also unclear to me at first whether or not the site's primary purpose is to sell products. Upon further review by another editor and myself, we have determined that your removal was correct. Please understand that based on your recent activities, your motives in removing the link were questionable -- it appeared like you were removing the link in order to try to make a point. In the future, when making edits that may be deemed controversial, it's a good idea to make note of your change on the article's talk page, giving a more extensive reasoning for your change. That way there's no question about your motive for said edit. --AbsolutDan (talk) 18:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


May I ask how you figure that the link to holdergals.net on the Cigarette holder article is a good link? It appears to be a fairly newly launched site with hardly any content at all... --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi fellow Wikiholic Dan! The reason I put it back is, aside from the fact that it was poorly added the first time, it is an attempt at community for those interested. If there is a better link to a related forum, please change it to that. :) I'm just trying to encourage connection for those of similar interest, and the link itself was not as bad as how it was put on there. Chris 16:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Mystery Shopping

Yes, you are right. It may have been unnecessary. My point was to stop people paying for readily available info, as for previous paragraph in the article. Regards, Asterion talk to me 15:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's great. I suppose I let myself follow the style of the previous paragraph. I am quite happy with your last edit. Cheers, Asterion talk to me 16:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good idea indeed!Asterion talk to me 16:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Site www.cigarettespedia.com

The site www.cigarettespedia.com is not a commercial one. We haven’t placed any advertisements inside of it. It is clearly stated on our site that we are not for or against cigarettes. The only thing we did and do is presenting a huge collection (more than 20 000) of cigarettes packs of different brands and countries that anyone can take a look at.

Our resource is absolutely for free!!! We use open source PHPWiky. Each user can visit this site and edit a page. The site www.cigarettespedia.com is similar to www.wikipedia.org by structure.

It is not clear why you remove links from articles containing descriptions of cigarettes brands from the site www.wikipedia.org? For instance: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regal_%28cigarette%29, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_%28cigarette%29, ... I think that if a user visits the site in order to read for example about Regal cigarettes, he will be also interested in knowing how these cigarettes look like, what brands are manufactured in different countries. He won’t find such kind of information in the Internet. The information provided on our site is unique from this point of view!

And in regard to the links from the pages http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cigarette ссылки, the site Cigarettespedia.com is a lot more informative than for instance the site: http://www.sickofsmoke.com.

And it is also incomprehensible why there are links on 2 sites that have the same contents and are cross-linked: http://www.globalink.org/ http://www.tobaccopedia.org/ that in essence represent the same organization.

This project was launched a month ago; we have been working on improving its content incessantly. Would you be so kind to explain us on what basis you remove links from the informative site www.cigarettespedia.com? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tutonhamon2006 (talk • contribs) 22 May 2006.

BARNSTAR!

The Original Barnstar
You have done such an amazing job, and seem to go under the radar. Awesome work! Yanksox 03:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


No biggie

I try to give praise where it deserves, people are to caught up in anger over here. We need to all be calm. Seriously, you just do such a great job under the layers. Yanksox 03:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Edit to BMW page

I added unitedbimmer.com to the Community Page next to bimmerforums.com. Bimmerforums.com and unitedbimmer.com serve the same purpose and do the same thing, however unitedbimmer.com does it in a much move civalized manner. Thus I do not understand how bimmerforums, and all the other forums listed under community can stay, and unitedbimmer.com must be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.150.109.46 (talk • contribs) 23 May 2006.

Please explain

I received a "warning" from you related to the Charles Paddock Zoo. This is my office computer, and very few people have access to it. I would be curious to know if it's possible to find out what time an illegal edit was made, so that I can figure out at whom I should yell! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.62.24.7 (talk • contribs) 24 May 2006.

Nazi Coke

Well, I'm surprised at the efficiency of Wikipedia to respond to vadalizing. Anyway, you're right. Even though Fanta has been called "Nazi Coke," it is a tid bit too non-NPOV for inclusion in the article. I apologize.

I wasn't really trying to vandalize, I'm not that sort of person. If you check my edit history (my user name is atomsprengja, if I didn't log in, it was because I'm lazy and not because I wanted to hide) you'll see I do rather mild edits (dialects of Totonac, for example).

However, you really need to get the Fanta article looked at. "Shipping problems"? How odd. Although I'm certain a picture of der Führer drinkind das Coke would not have gone over well.

Also, is there any way to standardize the Arabic transliterations used here? Do people realize that the letter "o," as in Osama does not exist in Arabic? And he's not the son of Laden, but son of Muhammad, who was in turn the son of Ladin. Not to say I agree with al-Qa'ida. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.240.161.241 (talk • contribs) 25 May 2006.

I noticed that you removed a link that I recently added to Roller Coaster. I don't know who is right, but I did not intend this to be spam and I will not try and re-add it. I understand that Wikipedia is not a link farm but I figured that it would be useful for the users of Wikipedia as a "Site with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as textbooks or reviews.". WillMcC 10:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Why was my site removed while another remains

Can you please explain why my site link, http://www.mustangevolution.com/saleen-mustang/, was removed for being commercial yet this site link, http://www.moddedmustangs.com/2006-ford-mustang-saleen-s281.html, remains listed?

Thank you.

BamaStangGuy 23:43, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


County Kerry

I see you had spotted User talk:martinogrady. Sorry for getting in the way!! Nelson50 00:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I looked at the roller coaster page and the "spam link" that you just took out actually looked like a very informative page with an excellent diagram. The website was not selling anything. I would suggest that it be put back --R'nway 00:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt response. BTW, I looked at his edit history and I see what you mean. --R'nway 02:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks

...for reverting vandalism to my user page. Cheers. Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 05:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]


Jeffrey Abbott/Jeff Abbott

If there is something not correct in the text formatting feel free to correct it. I am REALLY a novice when it comes to this. If you are challenging the authenticity of my comments in regards to “KEYBOARD” magazine I suggest you view my website, there you shall see a quote from the editor of the magazine. I do appreciate your efforts to keep it honest. You can also contact me at [removed personal e-mail address -AbsolutDan]

Jeff www.jeffreyabbott.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.167.100.96 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Since it will not allow me, please delete my entire page.
I will have someone else rescribe it at a later date.
Thanks,
jeff —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.167.100.96 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


jeff abbott

Thanks for deleting. Yes, i am jeff. I shall have this addressed by someone who can get the information formated correctly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.167.100.96 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, AbsolutDan! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. ☆TBC☆ 20:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why do u care so much

Why does it bother you so much that a hometown hero can not be on a wikkipedia page? Who do you think you are? Who and where do get authority over other people? Why do you get to make the rules here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.118.235.138 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

link removal on page DOEACC

sir,

i am myself a DOEACC student and i am working for DOEACC Society. I with some other DOEACC students are making an Non-profit website for other students. this is not a commercial or private websites, all our services for students are free and we dont support adds.

www.doeacc.net contains 5 forums in which students can post there messages for any help on any subject or on anything related with DOEACC. doeacc.net also provides services for there project, students can make there project and can upload in this website for us to host there project.

please mail me at (e-mail address removed -AbsolutDan) if you still think that this link should not be included at DOEACC page.

jai (admin of doeacc.net) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.211.162.138 (talk • contribs) 08:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedia of Cigarettes

Hi, I'm Craftni. I registered an external link on cigarette subject yesterday (http://www.cigarettespedia.com/) and it was deleted as spam. WHY??? The web-site I recommended is a very good one and much more appropriate to the topic then many others mentioned there. Your reply would be truly appreciated. Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Craftni (talk • contribs) 11:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Dan,
I asked on cigarettes "user talk" page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cigarette#SEEKING_FOR_ADVISE)if anyone has anything against the placement of cigarretespedia link on Cigarette topic. As far as there are only positive comments, I really don't see why it would be considered a spam. So, if you don't mind, I am going to place the link shortly.
Thanks. Craftni 11:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel,why did you remove link to super cars site on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercar ? Best Regards Mark —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rev22 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

MatthewH user page

Sorry, that was me edeting my own user page, (that I.P is my IP i must of logged out when i clicked back. Sorry for any trouble i may have caused you. but its nice to know we have RC patrols looking out for us, so thank you as well :D Matthew 01:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ITSM revert

I appreciate that this probably was done because it was a pointer to a commercial provider. However I have mixed feelings about this because so much of this domain has been created and continues to be defined by vendors. At the least, I wouldn't characterize it as vandalism. Can you help me understand the operant Wikipedia policies? Charles T. Betz 04:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dating site

Dear AbsolutDan!

I've added noncommercial dating reviews site to the article. As noncommercial as sites on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film. For example: 

 AURUM3 Movies (http://movies.aurum3.com/)
 Ain't It Cool News (http://www.aintitcool.com/)

But I don't want to make bad to somebody, I've just proposed realy good site with much information about dating and advices. So I will be very glad if you'll change your mind about this update to the article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Svaryk (talk • contribs) 15:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Cigarette article

The link that was added to the cigarette page, www.whyquit.com has perhaps THE most effective information on in for people that would like to quit smoking. There is so much false info out there, such as on the official link, www.sickofsmoke.com on the wikipedia page, about picking a date to quit smoking for example. Most people that quit, and stay smoke free, quit randomly, not with a pick date.

Take some time to read a little on the link that you removed, and you will understand better. It is not my site, either, just a good site to learn the truth from.

www.whyquit.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.1.74.240 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dan1679/Archive002&oldid=1142954134"