User talk:Michaelbirdsall

Reply to your question on anon ip page

The link was removed per WP:EL and WP:COI. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more specific.

I have read the section on external links and conflict of interest.

I believe this is an appropriate use of an external link as this page is copyrighted and cannot be included in wikipedia for that reason. How is this link not appropriate as an external link?

As for the conflict of interest, there is none. The article, which is linked to, endorses no one and is not controversial. It is a researched history - nothing more. Have you read the linked page?

I do not believe it's appropriate, hence its removal. You'll have to find somewhere else to promote your commercial site. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the wikipedia guide line

External links to commercial sites are permissible. "One common argument I hear is But so-and-so link is on that article, and it's commercial! WP:EL doesn't explicitly forbid In links to commercial sites; it depends on the notability of the link, its content..."

The content on the linked page is unique and valuable, again I ask where else is this information on this page available on the internet?

The linked page does not promote any product or service. As such, I fail to see how it is promotional.

Your belief that it is not appropriate is not a wikipedia guide line that can be followed. Please give me something concrete as this type of editing is largely subjective, which wikipeida clearly isn't.— 22:04, 3 February 2009 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Links to sites for the purpose of using Wikipedia to promote your own site site are not appropriate.

Here are some additional Guidelines:

SPAM
Conflict of interest
What Wikipedia is not
- Wikipedia is not a repository for links
- Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising
Wikipedia:BLOCK#Disruption
- Persistent spamming
- Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines.

Adsense pub-0888951372152980

Accounts

Michaelbirdsall (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
78.147.224.218 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
Ivaplace (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
62.166.193.157 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
--Hu12 (talk) 22:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hu12 - Thanks for the above. I don't understand the relevance of the following three broken links. Please explain.

They all have the same Adsense ID, which usually means they are owned by the same entity. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a collaborator with www.gmatix.com; I have no affiliation with interest-rates.org.uk nor with country-enterprise.co.uk. In terms of wikipedia guidlines, what is the relevance?Michaelbirdsall (talk) 18:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's standard spam/COI tracking. As long as you're not trying to re-add links to a site you are affiliated with, you don't need to worry about it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Michaelbirdsall (talk) 20:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]