User talk:Retailpatriot
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Retailpatriot! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule groups\.msn\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot 19:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Retailpatriot! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule groups\.msn\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot 01:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. R00m c 16:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to lowes, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia.Please read WP:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided.R00m c (talk) 04:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I am not a spammer. To call me one is ridiculous. I am a former Lowe's employee who provides an information site at all people interested in Lowe's. All materials are posted with source links included. It is a valuable "one stop" research tool for anyone (students, employees, anyone wanting information on Lowe's) You were never blocked or prevented from posting. Because you were trolling the website and posting inflammatory messages in violation of the rules, you had your message deleted after being warned numerous times by the moderators. Also, anyone can read and access site information without becoming a member. So again, you lie and misrepresent the facts. Our website has no commercial value. How can it be spam? Ridiculous. I will appeal you and your actions of vandalizing wikipedia and our information site to the highest levels at wikipedia. As a matter of fact I will attempt to contact wikipedia's CEO this morning regarding you and your defamatory statements about me and our infomration research site that you posted here on wikipedia. I suspect you have an ulterior motive, and it either is connected to Lowe's Companies or retailworker. I will also turn this matter over to my attorney and their private investigators. We provide information. Pure and simple. With links posted to sources. You lie and vandalize. Respectfully, RetailPatriot.
- Please see the Lowe's talk page for relevant information to this subject I posted my comments on this there, before I saw your comments here.
- My added comments since reading the above are as follows:Please, review your sites messaging system I received no warning for my block. I only posted one message in the forum site. I went down to comment about the topic "pets in the stores" and add my story about my local Lowe's policy on pets and it said I was not a member. I signed up again thinking I just did something wrong and it would not let me post still.
- Your site is spam. Please review [Wikipedia:Spam]
- It says:
Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed.
- You do not have to make money from your site. I myself own a website(that does not make money) and though I think it is a good site. It would not be right for me to add this great site to any Wikipedia article because I have a [conflict of interest]. I did not know you had a COI when I first removed your link. And I did not remove the link due to this. I removed the link because forum/group sites are not allowed. Every time you add the link it says in the name that it is a forum site. I do see that in this last edit you changed the name. Maybe that alone corrected the problem. Only by technical wording your site is still a group site. Any thing that starts with http://groups.msn are group sites. Now that it is apparent that you do have COI your site is still considered spam.
- (By the way, I read your new rules. With such one attack on Wikipedia editor I don't see why we should accept your demands for inclusion. Your rules do not allow Wikipedia why should we allow your site? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by R00m c (talk • contribs) 08:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 10:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Lowe's
[edit]Provided a third opinion at Talk:Lowe's. ¶ dorftrottel ¶ talk ¶ 21:11, December 6, 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 21:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Please don't do that. Some would even consider your edit summary a personal attack. I think that's a ludicrous statement, but some would see it that way and I would as well if it were repeated. The simple fact that Wikipedia even keeps your site - your unofficial site (despite it's official-sounding name) - should be gratification enough. Most of the time those links are shot on sight, so to speak, as self-serving and even advertising. Realize that I am one of the proponents of keeping your site's link in the article... please don't make me rethink that position by accusing me of vandalising. • VigilancePrime • • • 03:36 (UTC) 28 Mar '08