User talk:Johnloch

energy.sourceguides.com

[1][2][3] 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. --Hu12 06:50, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hu12 - Please give me some method of communicating directly with you regarding this matter. For example, send me an email message so we can communicate directly. The external link I am trying to add is not an inappropriate link as you have defined above. Since you are the person who seems to have a problem with this addition, let's communicate directly to resolve this.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnloch (talk • contribs) 19:05, 1 January 2007.

Your contributions to wikipedia consist mainly of adding external links and is considered WP:Spam. Looking through your contributions as a whole, the majority seem only to be external link related. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm. Please contribute content, not links. Don't simply direct readers to another site for the useful facts; add useful facts to the article, then cite the site where you found them. You're here to improve Wikipedia -- not just to funnel readers off Wikipedia and onto some other site, right? see Links normally to be avoided Hu12 00:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hu12 - Please explain why you reverted my edits to my user talk page. I simply tried out adding my signature to the comment above and then you go and revert the page with no explanation. Why?--Johnloch 03:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see my post below--Hu12 03:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will be contributing in other ways to the renewable energy section as you suggested since that is my specialty. I read the section you referenced (see Links normally to be avoided) and the site I am trying to add does not fit any of the 13 criteria. I can understand your need to be vigilant to guard against spam links and including too many links in the external link section, but you are not helping the users of Wikipedia by outright refusing to allow any new links to be added. I think there needs to be a better method in place for evaluating links. For example, I have no idea why the link for European Municipal Buildings Climate Campaign is included. This seems way too specific to be of use to someone who is generally interested in renewable energy. What is the proper method of removing such links?--Johnloch 05:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As Wikipedia grows in popularity the temptation to misuse its editability to bring attention to other websites becomes nearly unbearable. At one end of the spectrum are professional spammers seeking to drive traffic to commercial sites. At the other end are webmasters of simple community sites who just want to get more attention for their site. This potential for self-promotion on Wikipedia must be managed. Wikipedia is not a link repository. Wikipedia exists for the purpose of creating a collaboratively edited encyclopedia, not for any individual to promote a site that they have an interest in. This problem is only going to get worse. As search engine optimization becomes more prevalent, many web site operators will seek to use Wikipedia to increase the number of inbound links to their sites. Currently link spammers enjoy a lot of advantages from the lack of cohesion to the spam fighting process. It is possible to successfully sneak links into relatively unwatched articles. Such links may lie unexamined for months, gaining the appearance of legitimacy from having remained in the articles so long. When spam links are reverted, there is not much communication. Spammers can return and add links when different editors are watching who do not know their history of editing with an agenda. And spammers love to take advantage of the fact that Wikipedians assume good faith, luring us into discussing their links with them "on the merits" as if they had nothing but the good of Wikipedia at heart.--Hu12 06:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sign your posts

Hello. 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. 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!--Hu12 00:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not alter dates on posts, or edit other's comments on talk pages thank you.--Hu12 03:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]