User talk:Molleeo

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. 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. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 20:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship isn't necessary. My information is valuable and pertinent.

The information in these pages, especially the fetal development, is much better that what is there. Please compare the links http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment1.php and the one you have there and you'll see the information is better. Even though I am an owner of the site, and yes we're commercial, the information is both pertinent and of value.

You'll need to find somewhere else to promote your site. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 20:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to promote. Did you look at the information on those pages? It is pertinent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Molleeo (talk • contribs)

If you think the articles need more information, feel free to contribute content. The articles do not need ad-heavy commercial links. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 20:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so if we were to add text to what is there, that is okay? I figured to add as an additional resource, encyclopedia style a link would be easier, but I have no problem adding in.

You may want to check on "Babycenter" babycenter.com -- they have a large number of links on Wiki.

Thanks!

Jamie, here is an example for you -- there are several commercial sites here, Babycenter being the worst.

http://www.google.com/search?domains=en.wikipedia.org&num=50&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=babycenter&btnG=Google+Search&sitesearch=en.wikipedia.org check it out -- to be fair, they should be deleted as well. They have more ads than I do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=ivillage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=sheknows http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=babycenter

Three more examples of my competitors, commercial sites, bigger than my own on wiki. I would expect the same rules used for them.

External links [edit] General breast pumping information Breastfeeding Essentials - Breast pumps 101 Breastfeeding Online - Information about the advisability of buying a used breast pump BabyCenter - Choosing and using a breast pump Cerean Breastfeeding - unbiased reviews of pumps, general information about insurance coverage, and many other articles on breast pumping [edit] Milk storage guidelines Ask Dr. Sears City of Toronto Health Dept. Guidelines La Leche League Guidelines Molleeo 21:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up some of the links you mention (several of the babycenter sites, a few others). Note that there are cases where commercial site links are appropriate if the commercial site has sufficient notability; for example, you'll commonly see Yahoo! or MSN links on various articles. iVillage is probably notable enough that most people wouldn't object to an occasional link to it. The appropriateness of external links isn't a black-and-white issue (though when a user's contributions consist of adding the same link to multiple articles, that usually sets up the spam alarms). Sometimes, it's helpful to take the issue to the article's talk page to seek a consensus. You can read more about the policies and guidelines here. Thanks for understanding! OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 21:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you Jamie for understanding. Communication is what it is all about. What you mentioned makes a lot of sense, and I understand completely. We are notable, just not as big. We do have 30 mm pageviews a month, #2 in google when you type in pregnancy. All our aim was, was to help add content.

Question: If we submit articles as additional info, that do not have advertising on them, is that kosher? For example, if we were to take out the ads on that fetal development link, and resubmit it, would that be okay? All we want to do is share the information so folks know what is going on inside them. Our fetal development pages are more complete than the ones presently there.

As a note, there are still links to their content that are in the external links when you do a search. Not sure if those are kosher or not (for Babycenter). For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouth_breathing -- notable or not, is that kosher? I realize you said it isn't black or white but it should be information not size that helps determine, no?

One test I use for cases like this is: "Is there an alternative link with similar value at a non-profit, .gov, or .edu website? In the case of Mouthbreathing, there was. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 22:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know when you get a chance! Thanks again for being so on top of it! Molleeo 21:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't personally object if you re-added the fetal development link. Just avoid setting off folk's "spam alarms" by (1) being conservative with the external linking and (2) adding content to articles as well. Cheers, OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 22:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jamie! I appreciate it! Molleeo 01:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]