User talk:Michael Blohm: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:54, 9 November 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Michael Blohm, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! RJFJR 20:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wiredforbooks.org

There has been no message here yet, but I see that your account, and some other accounts, perform link-additions only. Therefore:

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. 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 before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

The link additions have been reported to our wikiproject on spam, see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#wiredforbooks.org. Can you join the discussion there? Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 16:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WT:WPSPAM discussion

Hi Michael, thanks for the message on the wikiproject for spam. I have answered there. I wonder if you could assess the links as they are now in wikipedia as some are not appropriate (though the most are). Some concerns:

The subject of the link has to be directly linked to the subject of the page (see our external links guideline), not like 'someone is talking about the subject of the page here'. These should better be removed or see 2.
Sometimes the link can be used as a reference. People are sometimes saying things in interviews which can be used to add content to the page and to use it as a reference. See the citation guideline, the footnotes guideline and the reliable sources guideline.
I have made a template for the link in the external links, {{WiredForBooks}}. Takes at the moment three parameters, though I think it would be good to only use the first 2 (e.g. {{WiredForBooks|whoever/|interview with subject about something by [[whoever]]}} (the | splits the parameters from the template name and the other parameters, first parameter creates the link to the document, the second creates (part of) the text). This results in:

Template:WiredForBooks

It would be nice that this template would be used for all links there (one would only have to change the template to change all pages on wikipedia). Also it would be good if the template got endorsed by a wikiproject as an official template. This makes the chance of this labeled as spam smaller. Again, thanks, and I hope we can welcome you, and the other editors, as new editors! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 The link additions have been reported to our wikiproject on spam, see [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#wiredforbooks.org]].  Can you join the discussion there?  Thanks.  --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 16:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
+== WT:WPSPAM discussion ==
+Hi Michael, thanks for the message on the wikiproject for spam.  I have answered there.  I wonder if you could assess the links as they are now in wikipedia as some are not appropriate (though the most are).  Some concerns:
+# The subject of the link has to be directly linked to the subject of the page (see [[WP:EL|our external links guideline]]), not like 'someone is talking about the subject of the page here'.  These should better be removed or see 2.
+# Sometimes the link can be used as a reference.  People are sometimes saying things in interviews which can be used to add content to the page and to use it as a reference.  See [[WP:CITE|the citation guideline]], [[WP:FOOT|the footnotes guideline]] and [[WP:RS|the reliable sources guideline]].
+# I have made a template for the link in the external links, {{tl|WiredForBooks}}.  Takes at the moment three parameters, though I think it would be good to only use the first 2 (e.g. <nowiki>{{WiredForBooks|whoever/|interview with subject about something by [[whoever]]}}</nowiki> (the | splits the parameters from the template name and the other parameters, first parameter creates the link to the document, the second creates (part of) the text).  This results in:
+{{WiredForBooks|whoever/|interview with subject about something by [[whoever]]}}
+It would be nice that this template would be used for all links there (one would only have to change the template to change all pages on wikipedia).  Also it would be good if the template got endorsed by a wikiproject as an official template.  This makes the chance of this labeled as spam smaller.  Again, thanks, and I hope we can welcome you, and the other editors, as new editors!  --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 10:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)