User talk:Reviewanygame1

Welcome!

Hello, Reviewanygame1, 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:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Reviewanygame1", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it appears to represent an entity. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. 99.136.255.134 (talk) 01:14, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ref Wikipedia Video Game Category

In short, no.

The length of a URL has no bearing on its use as a source on Wikipedia. Ideally, readers shouldn't see the URL anyway if the citation is formatted properly (they should instead see the title of the article being linked).
Sources are chosen on the basis of their reliability, not on the breadth of their content, and I have no reason to believe you are reliable.
We don't use a website as a source because they want to be used as a source, and we certainly don't go around adding citations to that source purely with the intent of adding that source. The would be citation spam. Additionally, seeking for other users to do so on your behalf is counter to WP:SPAM#Source soliciting.
We certainly don't use a source in order to promote them or give them exposure. WP:NOTPROMOTION.

Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 16:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and no, it is not OK to create a Wikipedia page about your site. You may wish to read WP:COI and WP:BESTCOI.Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 16:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Surely the whole point of Wikipedia is to include valuable content in the preferences, surely you actually look at the links that you are including, so surely the aspect of whether they are reliable comes from human intervention with the page, the same applies to editing Dmoz.

I cannot understand why Wikipedia would put loyally to top gaming sites over other sites with better content, just because they are reliable, whether they are reliable is irrelevant to the value the cited source bring to the user. The whole point of adding references is to actually look at the link you are adding and make a decision on the reliability, if you cannot do that you should not be adding links in the first place.

The whole idea is flawed and makes no sense, including crappy links from gaming sites with one video on it, no content is hardly useful to anyone, more so when the same video is elsewhere with stacks more information, make a mockery of the whole point of Wiki.

Besides, they are still including links from gaming sites which are being shut down, 1up.com, gamezone.com, and the others being shut down soon. I am not asking for a free ride, they all put there own links in wiki themselves without any assistance from you or anyone. I am never going to be able to compete with these companies when I am never given the chance.

At any rate, I am sure others will include my link when the site is on par with IGN, I cannot fathom your logic, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, in fact I believe it goes against everything Wikipedia is striving to achieve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.24.190 (talk) 12:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewanygame1, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Reviewanygame1! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer, but i have no interest here, the site is pointless and makes very little sense, more so when i see mods who are ages between 6 and 10 having admin accounts, i mean it just makes the site laughable if it wasn't so silly. I can perfectly understand how the mods setup is declining, I think before long it will be called wikinointerest.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.24.190 (talk) 02:25, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]