User talk:Enzoecarol

Welcome!

Hello, Enzoecarol, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Vejvančický (talk) 10:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Giacomo Gorrini

Hello Enzoecarol. Don't forget to cite your sources, please. Thanks. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC) ‎[reply]

June 2009

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. 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 the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. 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. Them From Space 17:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gariwo is no inappropriate source

It is a non-profit, non-advertising nor promoting (our Website has no sponsor tags at all) organization working on the Righteous and exemplary figures for 10 years at the international level and with the support and cooperation of very important scholars.

Therefore it is not inappropriate to link there when dealing with the biographies of the people who risked their lives to save the persecuted neighbour.

If you had looked at my links instead of deleting them all at once, you would have seen that each of them contained a sourced biography of the figure at hand.

I add these links to existing entries, whereas I write whole new entries when some Righteous or exemplary figures are not already dealt with in Wikipedia.

Besides this, we abide of the core of the links guidelines.

I could have improved the posting of links, which may have seemed to you as a dubious repeated addition (the fact is, I didn't look up the anti-spam rule because I was and I'm still pretty sure I wasn't doing any spam).

Actually nonetheless, the guidelines, including those regarding the biographies of living people, are definitively not against putting links that are meritable, high-quality and strictly on topic.

Please restore what you deleted.

Thanks, Enzoecarol (talk) 13:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please look over our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm and lists of links are discouraged here unless they add encyclopedic material that is unable to be presented within the article. If you feel the links contain encyclopedic material and they constitute reliable sources than feel free to write this information into the article and cite it in the references section as having come from that source, but please realise that this link is inapproriate in the external links section as it adds nothing that couldn't be writen into the article itself. Them From Space 22:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Hello Enzoecarol. If you continue to add links to gariwo.net, after seeing the above warnings, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Gariwo.net does not appear to meet the requirements of our WP:Reliable source policy, so no factual claims that are cited only to gariwo.net can be considered for use in our articles. This applies especially to biographical articles, under our WP:BLP policy. EdJohnston (talk) 16:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is in response to your comment at User talk:EdJohnston. I'm here on your page because I'm a Wikipedia administrator, and you appear to be violating our policies. Please don't assume you understand our WP:Reliable source policy without carefully reading it first. Gariwo.net occasionally cites *actual* reliable sources in its own articles, such as the New York Times. Those sources are acceptable for use in articles, though gariwo.net is not. EdJohnston (talk) 18:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear EdJohnston, I'm using the four tildes as written everywhere. You can say you don't know Gariwo. It's normal. It has existed only for 10 years and it studies the Good, not the Evil. If I had quoted the Simon Wiesenthal Center you wouldn't probably have questioned. But on the Righteous subject we are an authority along with Jerusalem's Yad Vashem and two other institutions based in Bosnia and in Armenia which we partly contributed to found. So you can't say Gariwo is not reliable because you don't know it. A part of the Gariwo.net site is so to say journalistic, but its background is scientific. Look up the site sections entitled as Books, Videos, Reflections and Documents and more of the like. These are our sources, and we always do much work to be updated and reliable. Please notice when I read the guidelines carefully I can't find any violation I might commit except for repeated add link (sorry! But one should tell it before deleting and not delete first and then search for the issues), therefore I really need your help to comply better and also to defend the honorability and reliability of the organization I work for. --Enzoecarol (talk) 18:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you disagree with my conclusion that gariwo.net is not a reliable source, you are welcome to raise the matter at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Be sure to give examples of the type of information about living people that you believe can be properly sourced to original reporting on gariwo.net. You can use examples taken from biographical articles to which you have previously added the gariwo.net link if you wish. If gariwo.net employs staff reporters you can give some of their names. Any original interviews that are done by gariwo.net people can be mentioned. If gariwo.net has a policy of accepting complaints and correcting errors, especially if they have published that policy online, you can mention that. If the quality of the reporting by gariwo.net has been cited elsewhere in any WP:Reliable sources you can mention that. For example, is anything known about gariwo.net's reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. I will not continue to monitor this topic, so if you have further questions, please raise them on a noticeboard or ask any administrator or experienced editor. EdJohnston (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]