User talk:Keithwatt
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding promotional messages as you did at Wireless Set No. 19, is a violation of our encyclopedia's policy even if you are promoting non profit activity. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - LuckyLouie (talk) 00:43, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- The encyclopedia text can't be used to promote websites, but I added it as an external link, how's that? - LuckyLouie (talk) 00:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hello OM, sorry to see you don't understand our policies here. I think you would agree that encyclopedia articles can't advertise whoever wants to place promotional messages in them. And I think giving you an external link certainly serves your purpose better. If you are a member of the Royal Signals Wireless Set No. 19 Group, you could really help us improve this article, perhaps by providing photos. Feel free to send me an email (go to my User:LuckyLouie page and click "email this user" from the left sidebar menu.) 73, - LuckyLouie (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
March 2010
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to Wireless Set No. 19. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:52, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Wireless Set No. 19. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. — Huntster (t @ c) 02:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Wireless Set No. 19, you will be blocked from editing. — Huntster (t @ c) 10:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
ANI
[edit]Please be aware that I've started a thread regarding your advertising at WP:ANI. — Huntster (t @ c) 10:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
This is the final warning you are receiving regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SGGH ping! 10:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Scott Mac (Doc) 10:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)How on earth do you reply! It's not obvious which is how I can't get in touch with anyone. When did the idea of email die? Keithwatt (talk) 11:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- You can reply here. I am happy to unblock you if you undertake not to readd the link. If you think it benefits the article, then please post a note on the talk page of the article and discuss it. The rule of thumb here is that when you add something to an article, if someone removes it, you don't replace without discussion. Your link also looks like it isn't appropriate - see the policy.--Scott Mac (Doc) 11:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
How on earth do you reply! It's not obvious which is how I can't get in touch with anyone. When did the idea of email die? Hmm, I wonder if this is how it's done. a degree in HTML (or Wiki HTML needed) I did write to 2 of your Wiki people via email because I couldn't figure out how to reply. Your messages appear as statements on a page that has no reply function or email link. Having registered an email address on Wiki, I would have thought an email asking/telling me about this would have been more appropriate than banning someone on a system that uses a none standard way to contact user, standard being via email. I am not advertising, I am not doing something underhanded and I am not just trying to promote my WEB site. I see there are a couple of other WEB site listed in this article and even a user group promoting their wares, but you've latched on to me copying their way of adding to an existing article with relevant information and much needed information that isn't available else where. No other WEB site has extensive document photos and written information for research on this exact subject of the Wireless Set No. 19.
I am at a loss as to why others can do what I did, yet I get banned for doing it?
Keith Watt RN MRCN. Keithwatt (talk) 11:08, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
- You didn't get banned for adding the link. You were blocked because you kept, repeatedly, replacing it and not responding to messages asking you not to. We don't use e-mail. You posted on a wiki, and you got replied to on a wiki. Be that as it may, I will unblock you and you can post a note about the link to the talk page of the article (click on the discussion tag) at the top. Don't replace the link without discussion. Wikipedia is a collaberative project. You might like to see the welcome page to learn more.--Scott Mac (Doc) 11:12, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello Scott, First I didn't reply simply because I'd no idea there was even someone trying to contact me, I am not used to any system that doesn't actually email you the message you are intended to read. When I did find out, it has taken me several hours of frustrated head scratching to work out how to reply and it still is not obvious or normal. This way of replying by editing a page just does not look to be the way to write a message to some one or reply to them.
The repeated re-entering of the information was because we thought some one was prating about, because it wasn't the same text being removed each time. I even wrote to two email address listed in the Wiki contacts for deleted articles, so it's easily seen that what I was doing was not malicious at all.
Scott, thank you for unblocking, but I'm not going to bother discussing this else where, simply because I am completely out of my depths in how to use the Wiki system of posting messages and not deleting bits and adding bits here. If it were a simply reply on a forum that would be fine or simply email messages to a forum, but this edit pages is just crazy for writing to someone.
Check the WS19 page again and see the last reference, it's exactly the same as I was posting, it's a link to another user group WEB site, which is why I thought what I was doing was correct.
Kind regards, Keith Watt RN (Rtd.) MRCN.
- Further to what Scott said, e-mail communication is fine and thank you for trying that, but talk-page communication is generally seen as more transparent and tends to get quicker results.
- We have strict policies on including external links (see WP:EL) to prevent Wikipedia becoming a haven for advertising and spammers, but even so many inappropriate links do exist. These will be removed when someone comes across them so they shouldn't be taken as a guide for what we do and don't accept. We also expect editors to discuss content rather than edit warring over it; you can use the article talk page (which each article has; click the "discussion" tab at the top of the page) or the editor's talk page (normally linked in their signature; you can find which editor to contact by clicking the "history" tab to view a chronological list of edits to an article). It would be a shame if this put you off contributing; you are most welcome to contact me either by email or on my talk page (linked in my signature), and I'll leave a welcome message below with some useful links. You could also look at Wikipedia: the Missing Manual if you need more information. I hope this helps. EyeSerenetalk 11:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
|
- Keithwatt, I sympathise with your bewilderment over how to work in Wikipedia: I too found it confusing when I started. However, if someone has left a message here on your talk page then when you are logged in to your account you will see a message at the top of the window saying "You have new messages", with links to this page. I am surprised you did not notice this before, but at least now you know for the future. Once you have found your way to this or any other talk page reading the messages and replying to them is done in exactly the same way as reading articles and editing them, which you had done 19 times before posting here, so clearly that posed no problem for you. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:52, 26 March 2010 (UTC)