A proposed deletion template has been added to the article AtHomeNet, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of AtHomeNet. Fabrictramp (talk) 21:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also 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! --SineBot18:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article AtHomeNet, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
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. TastyPoutinetalk (if you dare)17:19, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The site offers no content. It has a blurb about why a website is important for an HOA and them the rest of the site advertises your services for said purpose. The violations of the external link guidelines are pretty clear, Links mainly to promote a website, Links to web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services. There is also the problem of conflict of interest in that judging from your edit history, this has a high probability of being a sign with which you are associated. In short, adding a commercial site with the purpose of informing people about said services is not content, its advertising. TastyPoutinetalk (if you dare)17:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In response:
On the contrary, the page is filled with relevant information about homeowners association websites. It is not advertising our service, as there are many places you can get a homeowners association website. If yuor problem is with the fact that it is housed with other links to pages where we sell website service, then that can be addressed. To state that the page contains no relevant information is an observation that could only be approached if you did not take the time to read the page. There are sections on everything from why legally it is hlepful to have one, to the processes one uses to arrive at a decision to get one, to a history of why communities choose or don't choose to have one. With all due respect to your opinion, this page is highly informational to anyone wanting to know about homeowners association websites. It's appearance on the "website' and virtual community pages, is within the listing of "types of websites". There are mnay types listed, particulary in the sections speaking about "Community" websites. Whatever the protocol is to challenge your deletion, I would like to officially follow it.
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) 14:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After the discussion with fabric tramp, I can see that because the page is branded by a company that is for profit, that raises a flag with some of your editors. that being said, as I discussed with fabric tramp, the menu tabs for various services of that company are being modified, leaving the page as a stand alone hub for great information on homeowners association websites. While this may be a somewhat related link on pages like websites and virtual community, it is clearly related to the homeowners association page, and really there should be a seperate wikipedia page for Homeowners Association websites,as they are a legitimate topic that people have questions and need information about.
Is any of that problematic for you?
if so please advise.
Edenrage (talk) 14:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is clear conflict of interest - it is your site, or one which you are involved with - and the link should certainly not be added inline. The only article is is remotely relevant to is Homeowners' association and there it must be somebody other than yourself that adds the link. Please revert your re addition of the link. There is no consensus (or even replies) on Talk:Homeowners' association for the addition of this link. Read the links given... /wangi (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The link in the external links section can be added if you get consensus on the talk page. Do not add it back unless there is clear agreement to do so. Thanks/wangi (talk) 14:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please, do review the existing link on the article and suggest which ones should be removed on the talk page, or remove them yourself. However this is a separate issue from the addition of link you have been adding. Re-add the link and you will be blocked. /wangi (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So first you claim that no-one has responded to my request for wikipedia editors to chime in with their opinion on this issue...then when some do, you threaten them for having an opinion different than yours? Is this what wikipedia has become? I was under the impression it was a resource for the online community. I apologize if I was mistaken....--Edenrage (talk) 14:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an idiot. There is no reply to your request on the talk page, no consensus. Instead these two "new users" made the exactly the same edit as you and added the link to the article. These two users are you, especially when you consider the slight sprinkling of seemingly good-faith (but in reality unsourced) bogus edits before the addition of the link: Edenrage (talk·contribs), Pudri (talk·contribs), Kellyketty (talk·contribs). /wangi (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Website article is on the general topic of websites, so your links, even if they weren't self-serving spam, would be wildly inappropriate.
Persisting in your attempts to use Wikipedia as an advertising medium will--not may, will--see you permanently blocked. So please cease such attempts or attempts to change people's minds on this fundamental issue. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 00:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After the discussion with fabric tramp, I can see that because the page is branded by a company that is for profit, that raises a flag with some of your editors. that being said, as I discussed with fabric tramp, the menu tabs for various services of that company are being modified, leaving the page as a stand alone hub for great information on homeowners association websites. While this may be a somewhat related link on pages like websites and virtual community, it is clearly related to the homeowners association page, and really there should be a seperate wikipedia page for Homeowners Association websites,as they are a legitimate topic that people have questions and need information about.
Is any of that problematic for you?
if so please advise.
Also, a homeowners association website is a type of website, just as a social media site is like Facebook, or myspace, or the are that describes commercial websites etc. It may be unrealistic to include examples of every type of website, but to suggest that a page that goes into detail on a particular type of website is "Wildy off topic" when the page itself has a section called "Types of website" subdivided into categories, makes little sense. Would you not agree with that line of thought? I understand you are trying to do your job and keep advertisers links off, but if in trying to do this you deprive wikipedia readers who seek information of a legitimate source, then everyone loses out.
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 18:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article AtHomeNet, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
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) 14:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
