User talk:Minaksk

Links

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added to the page Autobiography do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Memoir. 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 attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. 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. Thank you. Also, please note my reply to your message on my talk page. ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tell me HOW they are inappropriate!?!??!?! I have been reading and re-reading and re-reading the instructions. This is TOTALLY appropriate.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Minaksk (talk • contribs).

First, please sign your comments on talk pages with 4 tildes (~~~~). Second, please review the notes and links provided above. Adding external links to a random website that purports to help people write is not what these encyclopedia articles are for. As suggested above, if you feel the links are appropriate, propose their addition on the article's talk pages. Finally, please don't use all caps; that is considered shouting and rude. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further, in this edit you provide a link to your profile at the site in question, which indicates you are a co-founder of the site. It is very inappropriate to add links to sites in which you are affiliated (as noted above). See our conflict of interest policy. Please stop. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where did I use all caps? The zealousness is very frustrating. You don't answer directly. I am not promoting my site. There is no link to join from that site. It's a great tool to help people write their memoirs, which is self-writing, which should fit perfectly if I"m saerching for memoirs I might be looking for tools to write my own.

People told me I should submit this to Wikipedia. I read the rules (spent at least 2 hours trying to understand them all, they're kind of convoluted). I fail to see how this breaks the rules. What if they submitted it, what would be the problem? What if I created a fake name (I wouldn't do that, although I know people have in the past, but what is the point?) and submitted it?

by the way, is this a talk page? Where did i not sign my signature? I don't even understand.

'Memoirs' is about people writing their own stories. Don't you think that if someone is coming to an encyclopedia page may be interested in writing their own memoirs/ autobiogrraphy? From doing this for a very long time I know that 2 big problems people have is intertia and fear. That forum, which doesnt' provide a link to register to oru site so could hardly be considered spamming, is useful, step by step data with a lot of links to other sites on how to write, how to start your story, how to organize it etc.

I have found a lot of bogus data on the site, obviously entered from people who don't know what they're talking about, and they're not taken down within 2 minutes of posting. Kristen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Minaksk (talk • contribs) 01:21:03, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

I'm not sure what you mean by "zealousness", but apologies if you are frustrated. Yes, this is a talk page, and every article has its own talk page, which you can access by clicking the "discussion" tab at the top of the page. You can read more about them at WP:TALK. Again, if you feel these links should be included, I'd suggest proposing them on the discussion page at the relevant article and letting other editors decide via consensus, especially given the apparent conflict of interest. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 19:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

=

Hi ZimZalaBim- can you explain to how this post is worthy (see link below), and our 1 link to tools for autobiographical tips & tricks to help people write their stories is not? I certainly did not sumbit an outright post about the entire company like this one did (our competition). This to me makes no sense. We cannot post a truly helpful link to users under the term "memoir" and "autobiography" that allows them information & tools to write their stories, yet our competition can have an entire post dedicated to their site? That's the biggest marketing coup I've ever seen then if they can get away with that.

I am reading their comments that the article was considered for deletion but kept because of inferences. The inferences were all parts of their PR about the launch of their company - ie selling their company. Their CEO is not a household name like Mike Arrington or Mark Andreessen or someone of note.

So how can this link exist, and the reference to writing tools I added (again, not even a post about the company) be removed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebBiographies

Thanks, Kristen

I know nothing of that particular site, but it appears to have satisfied Wikipedia's requirements for notability for webistes (since it is referred to in New York Times article, etc). Even so, the argument that "other stuff exists so why can't mine" usually doesn't hold much water. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 23:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Minaksk, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zim - Because one major newspaper writes about their smaller than our website after they put out a press release (the article was literally right after one of their press releases), they are allowed to self-post a site about themselves? Can you please explain this clearly to me? Because I'm really not following. All we did was to link a page that has useful information that is actually useful and helpful under the topic (memoir/autobiography). We didn't submit a site using our OWN name as a topic and write all about ourselves. I think this is a double standard, can you explain to me why it's not? Kristen Kuhns STORY OF MY LIFE 04:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)Thank you, Kristen[reply]

Like I said above, I know nothing of that site or the article. If you have an issue with it, take it up on its talk page. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 04:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one Zim, can you tell me what the difference is? I'm still not following how these rules are arbitrarily applied, whne clearly the rules are violated in no worse regard than what you're saying ours are. Doesn't make any sense. It's not logical. You can read both of the entries (I'm not sure what it matters that you know of those sites or not, that's not the crux of your argument for shooting our entries down).... Thank you, Kristen PS WHy do you tell us to go take it up with someone else? We want to know why they can post and we cannot; if that cannot be properly explained then something is not right in the system.