User talk:My Three Sons

Please stop adding commercial links to Wikipedia, as you did in Marissa Mayer. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 16:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have already explained my edits on the talk page of your IP address (which was your talk page before you created or logged onto this account) Please see User talk:69.142.234.133 for our previous discussion on this matter. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 17:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I already pointed out the appropriate guidelines which you are violating. You are adding a link to multiple articles. That violates WP:SPAM. Please read that guideline (especially the "how not to be a spammer" section) along with WP:EL. If you continue to insert links in violation of this policy, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 18:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The links were removed because you spammed them. Plain and simple. I'm don't know how I can be any clearer on this. Per guidelines, you should not add the same link to multiple articles. That's covered under WP:SPAM. If you are convinced that your link is useful for a particular article, mention it on the article's talk page, and allow other editors to determine whether the link is useful or not. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 19:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The link you added to the Westfield, New Jersey article is clearly related to the other veotag links you have added. This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 03:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between those 2 links is that I have not yet evaluated one (westfieldnj.com), but I have the other (westfield-online.com). You see, I keep on my watchlist thousands of articles that I have edited, and I monitor changes to those articles. New changes catch my attention much more quickly than existing content. I noticed the change you made to the Westfield NJ article, saw that the link was affiliated with or otherwise connected to the other links you have added (veotag) and removed it as such (per guidelines regarding spamming). Just because I haven't gotten around to checking out westfieldnj.com yet doesn't mean I feel it should stay. If you think that the westfieldnj.com is also not appropriate for the article, feel free to remove it yourself if you'd like. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 13:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This conversation is becoming increasingly circular. I have addressed your concerns in my posts above. If you cannot take the time to read and understand the applicable guidelines, there's nothing more I can do. For the last time, here's the deal:

You're adding multiple affiliated/related links across multiple articles (this violates WP:SPAM)
You have not brought up the link on any of the article's talk pages. Links that are not discussed, and do not have a consensus in their favor, are subject to removal. If (as you say) you want readers to decide on the link, mentioning it on the talk page is the way to do it, not adding it directly to the talk page. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 14:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware that adding content to an article that is meant to promote is also subject to spam guidelines. Please stop promoting veotag here. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 21:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absolut Dan - You are out of line

Dan,

By posting factual information from a notable organization -- Jazz at Lincoln Center -- about a new notable service that they are now providing to their community is not spam. Perhaps you should read and research the edits proir to deleting them. Had Jazz at Lincoln Center chose another medium to deliver their content, you would not have deleted it.

Your short sided and lazy editorial practice is a deriliction of duty and is a dis-service to the Jazz at Lincoln Center and wikipedia user community. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by My Three Sons (talk • contribs) 03:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, your systematic spamming of veotag-related material is against Wikipedia policy. I and/or others will continue to remove it wherever I see it. This new service they offer is not important enough to merit inclusion here. The article does not need to list every service they offer; a reader can follow a link to their official website if he/she would like to know more about these services.

Please re-consider your intentions here. If you are here solely to promote veotag, you will be sorely disappointed as Wikipedia does not accept promotion. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 04:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

on the contrary. you still have not put in the work to understand there is a fundamental paradigm shift in how audio and video will be viewed and understood on the web. You still don't understand that the convergence of the web with audio and video is creating a powerful new medium on how to communicate, teach and learn. the fact that notable social and education institutions have chosen to embrace this offering and make it available to their existing community and to use it as a vehicle to take their message to a larger community seems not to be relevant to you. the fact that you are unwilling or unable to put in the work to understand this paradigm shift is more of a reflection of your lack of intellectual curiosity than a measure how relevant the veotag offering is. Clearly by referencing the JazzED offering from Jazz at Lincoln Center ( an established wikipedia notable institution ) was relevant and important. your short sided editing efforts has denied the wikiopedia community of this important and relevant information. -- User:My_Three_Sons