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.
== Fantasy Football link removal ==
I put up some information relating to the origin of fantasy football, which I wrote and you left in place, you did not however leave the link to an article about the founding father of fantasy football Bill Winkenbach. I spent ages researching that and finding a decent article on Bill W. only for you to rip the heart out of it.
You are taking your role in this matter way too seriously and in this case have ruined a perfectly well written piece on the founder of the sport!
How can you justify removing that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tony James (talk • contribs) 02:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Hello Dan,
I just wanted to say thanks for your response. You have answered many questions I had about wikipedia. Nice one.
Heners —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Heners (talk • contribs) 13:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Heck, I couldn't have written such an elaborate response in a whole day's work. For that, together with your continuing work on the spam front, you deserve another one of these. Femto15:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, please. Get over yourself. He attacked my AfD, which was almost a direct copy and paste of his. If that's not a personal attack, I don't know what is. You've obviously taken the FFXIclopedia AfD personal yourself, and try to hide behind some elitist Wikipedian attitude. You lost the battle during the second AfD (the first of which was rightfully deleted because the page content was garbage anyway and shouldn't even count in the arguments for it's second and third AfD, but you would know this if you actually checked the history), and you won't give it up. You continue to cite guidelines and not policy. You continue to believe that Alexa rankings are the end all be all, which I might add FFXIclopedia has only continued to RISE in rank, passing the OFFICIAL FFXI website. The entire editorial process here is a complete joke. You keep saying that for something to be notable, it has to be cited in a reliable source, when Wikipedia itself is a most unreliable source. If you could even read between the lines, the people fighting to keep the article are only doing it out of principle, because so many other articles, less notable and less worthy of existing on Wikipedia continue to have a home here. It's no wonder that accredited authors who challange this site, comical news anchors, even the United States Congress (for mostly trying to remove unflattering comments posted by wikipedians), and former assitant to the attorney general John Seigenthaler (trying to save his own name from a false autobiography) have been banned from Wikipedia. This all stems from the attitudes of wikipedians like you and User:Sloane. Number of edits/whatever is not equal to the number of brain cells one has. Anyone can make themselves wiki police around here. And anyone can defend any article to the death, even if it is completely inaccurate or not notable. There are countless pages in Wikipedia that are only definitions of words - items that belong in Wiktionary, yet people like you get on your high horse and think you are judge, jury and executioner. You believe you are all knowing here at Wikipedia. You think you are a gatekeeper of information. I run a wiki containing over 15,000 actual articles with only 3 people to maintain the validity of it's content, and we do a better job than any self-proclaimed Wikipedia vigilante. I can bet you yourself don't touch that many articles or interact with that many editors.
What's most amusing about this entire situation, is that the people building arguments to keep the FFXIclopedia article, which are more well thought out and well written than any arguments to keep any article of it's kind, have actually said to delete the article. We don't care if it's here or not. We're just trying to show you and your kind the double standards you have. You can't even see it. You are horrible at debating and we actually laugh about this entire thing off the record. It's comical how when someone builds an excellent argument, you tuck tail and run behind a guideline and can't even provide a valid argument. A monkey can link to guidelines. If a team of nobel prize winning scientists decided to release their latest findings on Wikipedia, you would mark the article for deletion and cite guidelines about notability, etc, when you have no credentials to back anything up. --Ganiman14:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FFXIclopedia and Personal Attacks
Thanks for the message, but I'm done with Wikipedia. I think this place is the most useless and hypocritical piece of trash on the internet. Wikipedia plays itself off as this great resource, but it is full of biased editors with no credentials editing and determining the fate of articles on topics they know absolutely nothing about. It's a total farce. I would never ever recommend this site to anyone. It is garbage. --Rolks14:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you guys are glad to know he's been zapped. I've had a few imitators myself, a consequence of cleaning up messes, to be sure. Cheers! --Fire Star 火星03:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Could you please let me know why have you removed the userboxes of the article Satyabrata Rai Chowdhuri twice?
I look forward to hearing the reason from you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Satyabrataraic (talk • contribs) 16:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your kind advice AbsolutDan. I am a newcomer and did not know previously that I can not use userboxes on articles. Thanks again for teaching me the right thing.
its whatever, thanks for your interested.
onward, apparently your not allowed to delete other peoples comments from your talk page. soo.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whateverpt (talk • contribs) 04:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Reconsider link removal request
Hi Dan,
Thanks for taking the time to review my link submission of http://biz-whiz.com to "Work at Home Parents" page.
The edit can be found here - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Work_at_home_parent&diff=next&oldid=69450388
I request you to reconsider this link as I truly believe that the link I have submitted ads value to the article. The work at home community provides free information (articles, downloads, forum, free membership, tools etc) - It features over 20,000 pages indexed by google - see http://www.google.com/search?&q=site:biz-whiz.com
Do let me know if I am wrong about the value of this link,
Thanks for your consideration. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.92.203.57 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi - wikivoter's got an IRC channel now (#wikivoter) on the freenode network. If you use IRC, just sign in and one of the other mods in there will give you op powers. Martinp2321:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How do you nominate a page for deletion?
I found a horribly horrible page called Tina Small and its been there for several days with no deletion nominations... but i think it needs to be <_<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:TINA_SMALL
I added the link to the "How to Implement Tags Using PHP and MySQL" to the tags entry and I believe you removed them. I wasn't doing this to get money out of it; it was a contribution.
Why is this automatically removed without question?
hey Dan, been flat out with work so had no chance to fix blend corp wiki. will get a chance soon to try and do the sucker properly. anyways just sayin thanks for help and will be back soon. think ill have a better look at how def jux was done and try again.
I'm fairly new to the wikipedia community and could use some policy clarifications.
I recently contributed content to the Paid surveys article, expanding and clarifying the section about legitimate paid surveys. I also added Online Survey Source to the "External Links" section. This resource is, in fact, a list of legitimate paid surveys that are free to join. It seems to me to be an appropriate link, as it is contexually relevant and coming from a contributor to the article, but you removed the link and claimed it was "spammy."
The irony of it is that the first link on the resources list is inactive, and the third link on the resources is obvious made-for-adsense spam site. How are these better than the resource I offered?
I am a professor of conflict resolution and periodically go through wiki adding material and topics/resources which I believe are helpful and useful. Generally, I bring a single useful piece of information and go through wiki trying to contribute it where appropriate. You reverted a number of items which I feel should not have been. In looking at many of these pages, I see blatantly self-promoting material-which mine has not been.
The site has been a useful point of discussion and research for my classes and interns and I would hope to continue using the site. I realize you are trying to protect the site from spam and abuse, that is clearly your area of expertise: mine is conflict resolution and international relations and I believe I have something to offer on that front.
I I feel truly humbled & honored by your support in my RfA, which closed at 90 / 5 / 0. Thank you! If you need me for anything, just say the word. For now however, just like Mr Potter here:
PS: YES YOU'RE RIGHT HARRY POTTER USES A BROOM! (BUT GOOD MOPS ARE HARD TO FIND!!)
Smarthome Page
Hi Dan,
Thank you for putting the "smarthome.com" link back onto the page, I took it off because it is a retail link and I thought that perhaps that was part of the issue, but if not I appreciate you putting it back up there. I understand that the page reads like an advertisement, however, I work in the marketing department of Smarthome and sometimes it is hard to take off my marketing hat and just be informative. I tried to add factual history to the page from our website, but was told I'm not allowed to use that text because of the copyright (which is funny because I'm putting the page up as an agent of the company and I have permission from the owner of the copyright to do so). I gather that you are somewhat of a wikipedia expert and if you had some time to give me some suggestions on how to make the page sound like less of an advertisement I would greatly appreciate it. I have a million other things to work on everyday and it is frustrating to just keep trying different changes and then getting rejected. Please help. Any suggestions or input would be greatly appreciated.
Dan,
Thank you for your comments and suggesstions, they were very helpful. I have completely re-done the page, please take a look and let me know if the advertising warning can be removed now, or if the page needs further editing.
Mpleasant23:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Sources/Citing
Dan,
I added verifiable sources, quotes and their respective citations. Hopefully, the format is correct and maybe knowing where the info came from makes it less like an advertisement. I'm sure it still needs work, and other people's help would definitely be a bonus. However, my work wont be finished until the warning is gone. Thanks again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mpleasant (talk • contribs) 22:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Citations
Ok, great! Thanks for your help and taking the time to look at it. Hopefully the citations will be enough, please let me know if they are not. --Mpleasant17:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You
Thank you for working with me on the page. I learned a lot about how to do things on Wikipedia and I appreciate your patience with my editing ability. Have a great weekend.
--Mpleasant16:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
c-r.org links
Hi Dan,
Regarding links in Bougainville. We are not a commercial organization, we are a not for profit NGO and work in the field of peacebuilding and conflict resolution. One of our funding values is the benefit of comparative learning - ie actors in conflict or post-conflict zones could benefit reading first hand experiences from people who have been involved in a similar situation - our aim (as wikipedia's) is to inform and educate. I would therefore appreciate if you would reconsider withdrawing our link from the Bougainville site, as our issue (which, in concert with our values is provided for free for all to see on the web) on the Bougainville conflict is probably the only one of its kind (not a high priority conflict for many) and offers first hand insights from those involved in the peace process mediators and belligerent parties alike, detailed chronology of the conflict and key texts and peace agreements.
Dan - Thank you for your message and your comments are well taken.
However, compared to many other links in the articles I've added links to - I find it absolutely ridicilous to remove links that provide users of wikipedia references to primary sources such as peace agreements and ceasefire agreements (especially in articles that are exclusively about the agreements in question) as well as in depth analysis of the conflicts and peace processes (all ofcourse free for all to see - and let me stress once again that this is not a for profit organisation). So please could you have a quick look and judge for yourselve before you let your robots indiscrimanately erase all links that I make.
Hey, just a note about this. I've contributed a bit to a few of the articles on accords in West Africa, and have written on it in my other life, and I'd like to kinda add a voice of support for the use of c-r.org's pages for links to the text of the accords. As I mentioned in Talk:Abuja Accord (Liberia), I'm not sure if it should be as a reference or an external link, but I've definitely looked at al of the accords signed in the last 20 years involving Liberia, Sierra Leone, and the Ivory Coast on c-r.org nearly to the exclusion of any other source. Smmurphy(Talk)01:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Surch
Dan I wonder if we could get some assistance on this matter of deletion. I have changed the wording around now and wonder if it is ok now. If you could message me back or email me at info@surch.com that would be great!
Thanks.
Surch.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Surch (talk • contribs) 05:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Dan. Thanks and I understand. I have gone over it with another member of wikipedia and he helped us make the changes found on the page now...I hope they help. As you did mention our ranking on alexa of 73K... that is a 3 month ranking. the daily total for today was 32K. Most popular forums and review sites require that you are within the top 100K which we are by far. Although you are correct we are just coming out of beta, that doesnt negate the fact that we are on average getting consistent traffic and as of todays totals, we recieve more page views per user than google. So while our user base is small they are consistent and its growing. I hope this information helps. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Surch (talk • contribs) 06:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Dan, regarding the Abuja Accords and Rome Peace Accords, these are NOT COMMERCIAL LINKS OR SPAM!!! Pls if you would bother to take note of my last 3-4 letters to you, or if you would just click the link and look for a sec then we would not have to engage in this utter pointlessness.
I am putting the link up again, this is a primary source (please refer to discussion on the Abuja Accords) valuable to all those that are interested in reading the original text, and for your information this text is rather hard to come by and therefore serves a useful purpose. If you think differently could you please provide a more reasonable argument than your standard blurb.
Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hjalmarsson (talk • contribs) 02:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, looks like we havn't gotten anywhere. I'm going to go through this person's edits as best I can and figure out which links are appropriate, adding a note to each talk page. If you have a problem with this, let me know so we can work out a solution. I do not intend my edits to be a reversion, but rather the honest assessment of a valueable addition by an independent editor. I do hope that we havn't lost a new user, but I fear that we have. Good luck. Smmurphy(Talk)15:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
War Heroes
I have just started and I was wondering if I could create an article about a fictional video game I have a few ideas about. I look forward to your response.
KingCooper17:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The external link I added to The Noble Leader is legitimate. It is NOT a commercial site, and only provides content on the topic of leadership. Using external links that add to the content provided on a specific Wikipedia topic is a reasonable and responsible act. It is not spam. Accordingly, I plan to put the link back in.
Allow me to clarify why The Noble Leader is a legitimate external link.
I am writing a book on leadership, not just my 'musings' on leadership in a blog. I've spent several years researching the topic, and am considered an expert on the topic by my peer reviewers. If you're in doubt, then actually read what's on the website - not just what's on the front page.
Your point that I shouldn't add my own link is reasonable and I accept that. That's not a problem. It was a reviewer of mine that suggested that I put the link on Wikipedia. He thought it would be worth sharing. I will mention to him that it's not appropriate for me to add it, and will suggest that he do so.
Additionally, I've changed my approach on my own website. I will not publish "rough draft" material, but rather material ready for publication only. This may reduce the content somewhat, but everything within would be considered expert opinion by reasonable leadership aficionados.
There's one other thing that I want to say here. Wikipedia is about all of us. It's not just about your view of what you consider legitimate or not. I'm not in this for selfish reasons. I am passionate about leadership, and have spent years learning about it. I have a right to share my knowledge and a link to my book's non-commericial website is reasonable act.
Please stop forcing your views of what is spam on other Wikipedians.
This is totally unbeleivable. This is what I mean by the wikipedia being a tyrannical dictatorship. I knew I shouldn't have bothered to even come back. You all all totally psychotic when it comes to control of this stupid database. I didn't "recreate" the page. I put in a redirect because there were FFXIclopedia links all over the Wikipedia. The redirect went to Final Fantasy XI page. So instead of dead end links, there would be a redirect. But I guess even that is too much for you psychotic control freaks. I had no intentions of "recreating" the page. It got voted down. I can think of nothing more to add that would get it past a vote. So I have given up on creating a FFXIclopedia page. I figured I'd be curteous, though, and put in a redirect so there wouldn't be a dead end link. But if you want to be that freakin' anal, I'll leave it alone.
/clap Rolks - Man is AbsolutDan going to feel like an ass when FFXIclopedia starts getting recognition in the media --Ganiman14:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You guys are not happy about the FFXIclopedia article being deleted. Believe me, you've made your stance quite clear on that. Now you guys really need to pay attention to policy. One of them is not to engage in personal attacks. Ganiman, you've already been warned about this on your talk page.
You say "Man is AbsolutDan going to feel like an ass when FFXIclopedia starts getting recognition in the media" -- nope. You know why? Because right now it doesn't have that recognition, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. That means that if something doesn't meet inclusion criteria today, then it should be deleted today. If FFXIclopedia becomes a smashing success in the future, then it will meet inclusion criteria and can be revived then. --AbsolutDan(talk)22:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 August 29#FFXIclopedia on deletion review
Concerns with continuing reverts from another user
Hi,
I'm wondering if you can help me. I'm having problems with User:Sloane who keeps reverting all the changes I make to a page on Jim Hoffman. We've attempted some discussion of the changes on the discussion section but cannot agree on some of the issues. He has reported me for reverting his reverts, which have reposted wrong information (such as claims of nanotechnology involvement). Hoffman is a public figure, to some extent, gives talks and radio interviews, and it is problematic to have his website links deleted and re-insertions of citation requests via the reverts, after those have been provided. While User:Sloane and I disagree on the description of Hoffman as a conspiracy theorist, I don't see why this should be a basis for him to make wholesale reverts of all page changes. Can you take a look? bov23:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lifelong Learning Management System
>Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia, >as you did in Learning management system. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising >or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content >instead of links as long as the content abides by our policies and guidelines. See the >welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. >Thanks. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit >should not have been reverted, please contact me. --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:52, 29 August >2006 (UTC)
Dear Dan,
I understand your concern. Lifelong Learning Management System a.k.a. LLMS is a trademark registered by Auguste Enterprises in 2001. Auguste Enterprises partnering with LERN (an international association of lifelong learning programming, http://www.lern.org) became the first company to produce a completely web based management tool to incorporate the administration of Lifelong Learning for high schools, colleges and universities. I do not believe the link I placed is out of context in that sense.
I will be adding more articles about lifelong learning and related subjects. Some of those articles would have external links including but not limited to Augusoft itself. I hope this will not cause any issues.
I believe you will agree that an article about Kleenex could include a link to Kleenex.com, same as an article about Lifelong Learning Management System (LLMS) should include a link to the parent companies LERN and Augusoft. I do agree including a commercial link to Augusoft in an article about education would be irrelevant and should be avoided.
I emailed you last night and today, but I'm not sure you received them. I am also unsure as to whether or not I should post here in response to your concerns.
I understand and agree with your decision to remove the link from the Angel site. That was a poor choice on my part.
In regards to your other concerns on the site, I'm not exactly sure how I am violating Wikipedia's policies. I referenced several commercial/vendor sites on Wikipedia that are not currently under editor review and used them as a template from which to base my entry on. I assumed that if I included similar information, then I would be okay. For example, Blackboard, WebCT, Desire2Learn, and several other vendors, have the same contents that my site has. In addition, I attempted, and would like feedback from you if this was insufficient, to write the site in a neutral manner. For instance, I had initially used the word "enhance", but changed it to "facilitate", because I thought that was more neutral sounding. Concerning the external links, I listed so many external links because I modeled that part after the Desire2Learn site that also had several external links.
Finally, I'd be glad to beef the site up and share more content there. However, I'm not exactly sure as to what you would like to see. The other commercial/vendor sites are listed in the category of "software companies". I imagine that this would be the right category for our site as well. I can share more about the company if you like or I can discuss our approach to elearning (integrating social networking and LMS technology). Whatever the case, I'll be happy to do so, please just email me with your recommendations.
Thank you for your response. I'll respond here and not email you in the future.
I think we are in agreement on external links. However, I'm still sensing a little bit of a discrepency, or inconsistency, with the Desire2Learn site and, now, the Angel Learning site and our site. Initially, the Angel site was referred to as a "stub". I imagine you haven't seen the latest version, but it is now updated and in line with the other vendor sites. I believe it should have the same criticims you have of our entry and have the external links removed as you have already done with Desire2Learn. Thank you for being fair and consistent in that area. The primary area that I see as discrepent is Desire2Learn has one editor entry at the top that indicates it does not reference sources, whereas our entry has a big blue box that highlights that there are editor concerns. The Angel Learning site has neither a little box or a big blue box. I think that one way to maintain consistency would be to put a little blue box on our entry and a little blue box on Angel's entry.
I'll work towards finding external sources as well. Some folks at Educause did a podcast on us and a couple of elearning blog sites have mentioned us. These are not considered traditional media, but I imagine the new media emphasis as evidenced here in Wikipedia will likely warrant that these links are okay and helpful in meeting the software guidelines.
Thank you for your efforts and integrity. I appreciate the compromise and will do my best to add additional, credible, external sources, in the near future. I don't know if you noticed that I did add an educause podcast. I'm not sure if that is sufficient, but it is from a elearning instructional designer who is not at all affiliated with our company.
You had made comments on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netvouz page about sources not reliable. However, they are valid and reliable. A user of the Netvouz service wrote, on their own, the original article and then I, part of the Netvouz development team, have verified the content. So it's all OK.
I appreciate your efforts here to make articles better. I see you posted some tags on the article I created about DJ Lynnwood. Just to clarify, I am NOT DJ Lynnwood. I am a big fan of DJ Culture and underground music. As to relevance, to my knowledge (SoundScan) DJ Lynnwood has sold hundreds and thousands of records in the US and abroad and is a nominating member of the Grammys. He is on the radio every week for 4 hours in many markets, and appears as a guest on many radio stations and satellite radio.
i see many similar DJ's in Wikipedia and intend to add more. But they are not tagged irrelevant, and their articles are so much less information and short. Can you help me make article better and verify so these demeaning tags are not neccessary?
Today I want to add article on Swedish Egil, very similar history as DJ Lynnwood, Richard Humpt Vission, Bad Boy Bill.
I added my link because I believe that my article adds relevant content and tips to the topic.
I don't understand how my link is different from Gina Hiatt's link about "The Three P's" which is an article within her web site about her academic coaching services.
Do I need to read further about the types of information and links you are looking for? I believe that if my link is removed, then you may also want to remove the link to Dr. Hiatt and Dr. Kuther's articles because all three are articles on procrastination specifically targeted for academics.
Thanks so much,
Mary McKinney —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.65.204.103 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Dan,
I tried to leave you a message - did it go through? I thought that my suggested link should be reinstated.
Thank you,
Mary McKinney, mckinney@successfulacademic.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.65.204.103 (talk • contribs) 02:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Back from Holiday
I just got back from holiday. Thank you for your response. I have another question, is it possible to see Domo1234's contributions?
KingCooper16:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia.
With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you.
You recently removed links to two articles that I've written on eLearning 2.0 from that page citing them as commercial. While certainly I'm commercial in that I run a business dedicated to web and eLearning development, I've created a personal blog that is separate from my business and it is not commercial. Instead I put content there that I write about (for publication in places like ASTD's publications) and speak about.
I would be curious why you find the articles that I linked to as being commercial? I have a completely different mindset when I writing, speaking, etc. I'm really trying to help folks in corporate learning functions understand what is going on. I truly think those articles are helpful and they've been cited a fair amount (as has my blog as a whole) espcially in the small corporate eLearning circles. Am I missing something here?
I'm really not trying to be a pain or something here. I find Wikipedia itself to be extremely valuable and understand some of the challenge (but not that well). At the same time, I feel I have something to contribute. Heck, I created the original article based on what Steve Downes (who is primarily in academia) and I (primarily in corporate world) and a few others have written about the subject.
Take Care,
Tony
P.S. As a follow-up thought - since it appears that this is a common discussion with you, maybe you could include some of your responses to the above "talk" so that I wouldn't be asking you the same stuff. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.115.126.182 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Dan - as a follow-up I now realize why I don't see your responses here. I've responded back on the appropriate discussion area. I assume you get feeds for those?
Can you please take a look at this article? An anonymous user,58.69.210.239, decided to redirect the article without any discussion or consultation. The redirect to the Invader disambiguation page is of no help whatsoever, and makes little sense. I am not certain about how to revert it, though I attempted editing to an earlier version of the article, and it did not work. Your help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. ---Charles04:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick action on this matter. It is appreciated. I cannot figure out, though, why it gave me an error message when I attempted the revert myself. Must've just been a hiccup, so to speak, in the system. ---Charles04:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
why?
why can't I put links to stuff which could be useful?
PDFs of lyrics can be printed and used for karaokes.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jembo (talk • contribs) 13:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
everthing seems to link to cosmopolitan....useful? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jembo (talk • contribs) 13:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Mistake
Hi Dan,
Let me first apologise for an un-intended mistake from my part.
I tried to add 'cite news' to the maintanance tag of 'The Indix' and has accidently removed the mainatance tag and having the citation added to the main page of The Indix.Please help me with it.
I once more apologise for the trouble.
Thanks-
Jaitha10:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Once again I thank you whole heartedly for your patience & help.I will defenitely try edit it as you instructed and assure you that I wouldn't mess up things again.I am travelling right now and will be back at my desk on 10th September. --Jaitha08:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As this article was similar to the article entry just above it, I am unsure as to the reason of its deletion.
-
In addition to the article, I also added a reference to a book from a time management expert in the 'Further Reading' section of the Wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_management.
I entered the book in a fashion identical to the others found here, and am also curious as to the reason of its deletion.
I would like to make a contribution which is valuable to the readership of this open source of information, so I appreciate any assistance which you can provide me with in understanding these issues!
I noticed that the List Of Weapons Used In Videogames needs editing. It has must out several games, and I tried to put in alink but they don't exist. I need a link to Call Of Duty: Finest Hour and Call Of Duty 2: Big Red One, as I have visited these pages before. KingCooper14:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete page
Hi I recently created a nonsensical page for fun. Sorry to violate the rules. Please delete the page David_valdman. I'll do my playing in the sandbox.
I created a new page for Mark Barry the football hooligan, rather than change the page for Mark Barry the musician. Yet it has been deleted. Has anyone who is doing the deleting actually researched football culture and seen the references to Mark Barry? As I posted on the discussion page (though it has since been deleted, for some reason), yes, there is some nonsense there, not added by anyone who I know of who has worked on the page, but the person is very real and the facts are correct. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PipeDown (talk • contribs) 19:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd say: no, there is no evidence that the edits have any merit. There are essentially two versions of the article: one of them is a valid stub about the musician, the other a long, barely coherent piece claiming that he was a football hooligan (probable hoax), inserted in place of the real article. - Mike Rosoft21:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for supporting my RfA! It ended up passing and I'm rather humbled by the support (and a bit surprised that it was snowballed a day early!). Please let me know if I can help you out and I welcome any comments, questions, or advice you wish to share.
Are you a paid censor or this is your calling? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vladko (talk • contribs) 09:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Articles tagged as nonsense
uh...dude, the stuff i wrote is not nonsense its 100% fact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Delsol312 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
look at the guys page, all he does is bother people with nonsense. its not uncivil, its extremely civil. and who are you exactly? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.16.15.150 (talk • contribs) 04:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
you began your response with "first" but i found no "second" point which responded to my question, 'just what's wrong with what i said?'
and i bet you are a betting man. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.16.15.150 (talk • contribs) 06:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
CMMS Article Changes
I'm sorry, I did not mean to advertize on Wikipedia. I was afraid my contribution would have been misunderstood. At my work place, we use Mainsaver as our CMMS. While doing research on such systems, I noticed the Wikipedia articles did not have references to CMMS products. I added the reference because I have seen other Wikipedia articles, for example, Bittorrent clients, which have references to products. I'm not affiliated with Mainsaver (actually, I don't even like the product) but I was hoping to contribute a reference to the CMMS article.
Open-source CMMS systems include MyCMMS and Free CMMS, and a few others. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.35.86.19 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Links
You said this:
Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia, as you did in RTLinux. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links as long as the content abides by our policies and guidelines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --AbsolutDan (talk) 14:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I feel the link to the RT Linux article was very relevant. It was my own RT Linux experience, and I have been told to maintain this page by my university
You can see ther page here: http://www.jeetu.isa-geek.com/rtlinux
Moreover, the page does not have any Ads. It is not a commertial website!
Do whatever pleases you, I was just adding useful content! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeetum (talk • contribs) 19:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
You reverted all my contributions.
Yes, all were links to my site, but all were informative! And the site is not a commertial site. It does not have any kinds of ads —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeetum (talk • contribs) 19:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
SHOUTcast link removal
hey, i was just wondering why my SHOUTcast bit was removed, did i breach any rules? it's just i researched loads to find them sites which give users servers and things, they are supported by SHOUTcast themselves! lol! Please write back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fanta206 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
