User talk:Logistictech

Welcome!

Hello, Logistictech, 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! --Ronz (talk) 20:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Links

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. [1] --Ronz (talk) 20:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree that those external links are spam... they are a vehicle for advertising as I see them. Yes, they contain useful information, so I would encourage an interested author to write it into a non-copyright-infringing form and place it into the public domain on Wikipedia. But the links need to stay out. sinneed (talk) 22:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your comments

The articles at xpertfulfillment.com are not considered reliable sources.

The links to it have been added as references, blatant advertising, and external links. If you are going to blame anyone for the recent deletions, blame the editors that added the blatant ads. --Ronz (talk) 22:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blame User:Bobboylan, User:Moohoo2, User:Freddyxmac, and User:66.227.189.182. --Ronz (talk) 00:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your response

I concede, since it is obvious you wouldn't let it go anyway. I understand your motivation, and I will try to contact xpertfulfillment.com to see if it would be worth their time to develop something for the public domain. I don't want to "blame" anyone for trying to add valid links, however I am confused by your logic.. If someone makes a piece of art I like, and you destroy it.. I should complain to the artists for making it in the first place ? Wouldn't it make more sense to say "that art doesn't belong in this gallery?" - just a thought. Btw - looked at your "contributions".. you have a long history of removing things where the validity is debated.. and not a lot of history making contributions.. kind of goes against the spirit of this site.. just imagine how much you could've enriched the content of this site, if you would've spent your time and energy adding to it.. instead of taking from it. I will be adding several reliable sources in the next couple of weeks. Logistictech (talk) 02:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"If someone makes a piece of art I like, and you destroy it." I'm not destroying anything. Maybe a more accurate analogy is that someone makes some art, then someone else comes along and adds advertisements directly to the art piece.

I have a very long history here. Maybe my history is the way it is because there is so much improper information to remove?

I think that getting xpertfulfillment.com to do anything at this point is a waste of time, given the number of accounts that have been identified as spamming their site. Perhaps you can get some of the to contribute to the articles instead? It's usually fairly easy for individuals knowledgeable in a topic to propose references to expand or support articles. --Ronz (talk) 16:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

again?

"Wikipedia is not a place for opinions.." and yet you don't hesitate to give yours. You should contribute to articles. Instead, you have spent the majority of your time taking away from something others have worked hard to contribute to. You obviously have way more time available to debate things than I do. If I had the time, I would debate with you.. but honestly.. thats all you want.. your history shows it. I am having a hard time finding where you have actually contributed to Wiki.. You do have a pattern of WP:DIS Disruptive Editing or in the least WP:TEND..

From WP:ELYES

What should be included

3)Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.

4)Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews.

Tell me precisely how a list of industry - article specific definitions do not qualify for the above? Or don't .. at this point, you have almost discouraged me entirely from contributing to any degree.

Logistictech (talk) 20:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CIVIL. --Ronz (talk) 00:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. it's unfortunate.. especially when you feel the need to file a spam report when you have acknowledged that I have stopped adding the link. Even though I feel it is a valid external link. If you dissagree, please explain. As I have said before, I am new, and would like to understand, rather than debate, and take it to the talk page as you originally suggested. I would like to offer you an Olive Branch Do you accept ?

Logistictech (talk) 08:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice - xpertfulfillment.com

A spam report has been started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#xpertfulfillment.com --Ronz (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]