User talk:Mr. innocent
September 2008
[edit]
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Fringe (TV series). 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 nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. 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. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
I did just as you advised, and you took my post off of the talk page using Twinkle. What exactly is the reason you don't want the link added? Do believe that I have an affiliation with Hulu? I don't have any affiliation with Hulu. Wikipedia aims to provide information. The Hulu link provides more information, because it provides exclusive interviews and allows the shows to be watched on the Internet. The fact that this may "attract" Wikipedia users to Hulu.com, or "promote" Hulu.com, which makes ad-based revenue, is beside the point that the link is useful to Wikipedia users seeking information about Fringe. Any external site linked to on Wikipedia could be argued to "attract" users to the linked site, as could any hyperlink. Any company website that displays ads could be argued to be "promoted" by an external link. The other external links are also to companies that make ad based revenue. Why allow them when Hulu.com provides more information, with higher quality. Should the entire Fringe TV series article be removed because it serves to promote Fox? Mr. innocent (talk) 01:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- It violates WP:EL. Wikipedia is here to provide information, not as a link directory nor for fansites and other wikis to spam themselves here. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
I have zero affiliation with Hulu. Hulu provides information on Fringe.
Mr. innocent (talk)
- Your only edits have been to attempt to shove a single website's link in an article. It certainly appears spammy. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- My only edits that you know about. Appearances can be deceiving. If you hadn't deleted my addition to the talk page, you would have seen that not everyone agrees with you. I have a word for people who delete posts from the talk page simply because they disagree with them. Censorship.
- Thanks for informing us that you may be a sockpuppet. That said, your post was removed because it appeared to be an advertisement and was removed per WP:TALK. Wikipedia isn't a forum. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- I am not a sock poppet. How did you deduce that? How dare you attack me like that. Wikipedia is not a battleground. No insults. You are guilty of biting the newcomer. Just because my first registered post on this wiki project was an external link to Hulu doesn't mean that I am affiliated with Hulu. I have performed many edits on Wikipedia. Whenever I see a missing word, mismatched tense or number in a sentence, or sentence ending in a preposition, I fix it without receiving any credit. Second to Google, Wikipedia provides me with most of the information I receive. I use Wikipedia many times each day. But now I've lost my faith in Wikipedia. I try to make Wikipedia better, and I get called a spammer. Instead of directing me to the page that explains Wikipedia's already developed position on external links to Hulu.com, my question was deleted from the talk page. I defend the fact that I am not here to spam, but simply make the Wikipedia I know and love better, and I get called a sockpoppet. I used to believe in Wikipedia. I used to think that it was a monument to people working together, where anyone who thought they had an idea to make it better would be respected and given an answer to their questions, even if misguided. Now I now it is like the rest of the world, where those in power shun the efforts of the weak. A Wikipedia where a long time fan and contributor to Wikipedia is called a spammer and sockpoppet simply because they tried to make Wikipedia better is not the Wikipedia I now. In the future when a newcomer makes similar suggestions, I hope that they be given a message explaining the existing policies rather than simply have their posts deleted.Mr. innocent (talk) 21:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for informing us that you may be a sockpuppet. That said, your post was removed because it appeared to be an advertisement and was removed per WP:TALK. Wikipedia isn't a forum. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Um, you are the one who said "My only edits that you know about" implying that you have edited under other accounts without any clarification. Under this user name, all of your edits have been to attempt to add a Hulu.com link to an article. As for being a "newcomer", you sure seem to know several Wikipedia guidelines, policies, and terms. As for Hulu.com, the relevant policies/guidelines were linked to when the links were removed. They were also linked in the messages you got above, which is what you just said people should get. Come to think about it, what talk page comment did I supposedly remove of yours? Your edit history shows you posted one, which was not removed. Now, if you mean the post by IP 96.26.215.52 was yours, the subject line of that post was pure advertisement and showed on actual relevant value to the article. Indeed, it seemed to be yet another attempt to push an illegal copy of the series (which, if you have followed the article for any time, you'd know has been a major issue...people posting links to the illegal copies of the pilot episode). If that was you, then yes, a message WAS left at the IP's talk page also explaining why it was not appropriate. If you didn't read it, that isn't my fault. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- I have never edited under other accounts. I do not "know" guideline, I am simply intelligent to find them myself, and thought I should show where you are wrong, since you are attempting to do it to me. My post from 96.26.215.52 was not for an illegal site.Mr. innocent (talk) 22:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Um, you are the one who said "My only edits that you know about" implying that you have edited under other accounts without any clarification. Under this user name, all of your edits have been to attempt to add a Hulu.com link to an article. As for being a "newcomer", you sure seem to know several Wikipedia guidelines, policies, and terms. As for Hulu.com, the relevant policies/guidelines were linked to when the links were removed. They were also linked in the messages you got above, which is what you just said people should get. Come to think about it, what talk page comment did I supposedly remove of yours? Your edit history shows you posted one, which was not removed. Now, if you mean the post by IP 96.26.215.52 was yours, the subject line of that post was pure advertisement and showed on actual relevant value to the article. Indeed, it seemed to be yet another attempt to push an illegal copy of the series (which, if you have followed the article for any time, you'd know has been a major issue...people posting links to the illegal copies of the pilot episode). If that was you, then yes, a message WAS left at the IP's talk page also explaining why it was not appropriate. If you didn't read it, that isn't my fault. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)