User talk:Jay ryann

Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, Jay ryann! Thanks for adding the link over on the Charlotte Brontë article. Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:

Take a look at the New contributors' help page, the Wikipedia Tutorial and the Manual of Style, and If you still need any help, you can always post your question at the Help Desk.
When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia and Assume good faith, but please keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends: Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: ~~~~. Best of luck, Jay ryann, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 02:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Magellan e-books External Links

These links are often redundant, and the exclusive focus of your contributions on Magellan products gives an appearance of Conflict of interest. Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory 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 exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. 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 to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Wareh 05:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify. Please consult the links above for Wikipedia's external links guidelines. Even if you have nothing to do with the Magellan Freebooks (but the fact that you uploaded the Magellan logo and wanted to add links to Magellan Guides will seem to many at odds with your denial of a conflict of interest), the fact that linking to them is the only contribution you apparently want to make to Wikipedia will make other editors think that you have a website-promotion agenda, not an encyclopedia-improvement agenda. I encourage you to get involved with improving the content, style, etc., of the actual articles.

None of the links I removed was providing unique access to a text—Magellan is just taking public domain material prepared by others (e.g. Gutenberg) and re-releasing it as PDF's. Basically, the reason for removing them is that Wikipedia easily becomes littered with bunches of rebranded versions of the same text. It is confusing to readers, especially when you do not include information about the edition, translation, etc. It's more important for someone trying to learn more about Machiavelli's Prince to know the date & author of a translation than to know it's available as as Magellan Freebook.

Wikipedia is a community driven by consensus. So don't take my word as gospel. However, you MAY take the fact that no one undid my reversions & restored your links as a sign that the many editors who noticed what I did thought it was reasonable. To add links that editors will regard as positive contributions:

Don't be a single-issue editor (see above).
(essential) Figure out if the translation/edition duplicates one already linked. I believe that in 90% of cases it will. in these cases, simply add, on the same line, in parentheses, something like (also in PDF), where "in PDF" links to the appropriate Magellan page. (Do you see how this would be more informative and less cluttering? I appreciate that you find this format useful, but the fact is that to users in general, a huge "brand" like Gutenberg, whose simple & repurposable format, and whose long presence and clearly public mission have won it a lot of trust and loyalty, is going to remain the point of reference.)

I wish you the best in improving the encyclopedia. Wareh 16:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I selected the Magellan group to add as a Wikipedia article because I found both services to be very helpful and there were no links or articles about them yet. A friend showed me both sights and I saw an opportunity to add to Wikipedia's content. It's not that they're my only contribution to Wikipedia...it's that they're my first and I want to make sure I'm doing it right before I go start editing articles that other people have already worked so hard on. As for the books links, I realise that they are often redundant with the Gutenberg links in terms of content of the books (i.e. they're the same edition etc.) but I think the reason they should show up on Wikipedia is because they're unique in format. I just found them so much better for reading online (or printing) than the Gutenberg texts - even if they're the same text, the format is just so much more conducive for the purposes of reading it. I realise that Project Gutenberg is an awesome resource that offers 'simple and repurposable' format but I think people will benefit from these versions also. I think others will too. I think that the suggestion of the "in PDF" is great though. I'll use that in the future.

Jay ryann 20:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, if you keep the links concise (I really don't see a reason to mention the Magellan name, for example) and clearly marked as an alternative format to another linked text (the same edition in another format), I think you are much less likely to see them removed. I certainly wouldn't under those circumstances. Wareh 21:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions, Wareh. I'm just trying to make it proper to Wikipedia specs and (in both cases) was just duplicating what others had done. Good point about specifying it's the same edition in a different format too. Jay ryann 22:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my suggested compromise still got you in trouble for going against the policy not to use Wikipedia for website promotion (see warnings and block below). Sorry I didn't manage to come up with advice for you that would have steered you clearer of trouble. As you can see in the answers to the comments I left for the administrator who blocked you (User talk:HighInBC), an account like yours that is used only for providing revenue-generating links for someone is considered a clear-cut taboo. Wareh 20:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming of http://www.magellanfreebooks.com

magellanfreebooks.com
Adsense pub-5275076323172934

Spam sock accounts

Jay ryann (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This is the only warning you will receive. Your recent insertion of spam, commercial content, and/or links is prohibited under policy. Any further spamming may result in your account and/or your IP address being blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. You are, however, encouraged to add appropriate content to the encyclopedia. If you feel the material in question 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 to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. --Hu12 19:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. 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. -- Satori Son 19:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

W

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked you, this was perhaps a misunderstanding. We have a lot of problems with spamming here. Have fun contributing. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 05:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:MagellanLogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MagellanLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]