User talk:Helpsome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I couldnt realize that how you are destroying your authenticy by showing such false information about a well known educational institute by relating it with terrorism while the matter is the institute itself is facing severe brutality by different millitant organizations. Please give only authentic information to the people.

Spam ??[edit]

Dear Mr. Helpsome, I really don't understand why you changed the external links of those pages. Indeed aviation-accidents dot net is the ultimate resource for aviation accidents reports : that wikipedia is a page related to an accident report and having a link to the official pdf report is a must. I think you should reconsider the change. Thank you.

You hadn't edited since October of last year and yet you went straight to two articles where this link had been removed two hours earlier. There has been an ongoing effort to spam this link into multiple articles. Please stop. Helpsome (talk) 10:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Cheek (surname)[edit]

Mr. Helpsome, you removed many names off of the Cheek surname, these people were very important, influential,and prominent members of the Cheek family. I am angered that you removed the people from the page for no reason. As a fellow Wikipedia nember, I highly suggest you put the names back or i will be forced to contact Wikipedia administrators and have this decision repealed.

You added unreferenced information. Information added to wikipedia needs reliable sources especially if it is about living people. Please don't attempt to threaten me. Helpsome (talk) 03:08, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I know all three of the Cheek family members that I added and had their consent for adding their names. The information about then was also factual, for it is available on numerous articles throughout the Internet. You yourself should do some fact checking aswell. Instead of being a Know-it-all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charliecheek1979 (talkcontribs) 03:26, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Charlie, typically we only add people to these kinds of pages (articles about a name, surname, a list of people, etc) when those people already have an article on the English Wikipedia. Articles about names are not a phonebook where every person gets listed, only notable people do. And yes it is YOU who has to do the research and provide the sources if you want to add any info to Wikipedia. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 11:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi, helpsome. I realize I initially posted too many links on pages of loose relevance, but I'm still not clear why you've removed my recent edits for the reasons I mentioned in my edit summaries. They are spot on the topic and indeed replace dead links to the same interviews posted 2007 and 2008. I realize entries should not be a collection of links, but under the "external links" section are these links not appropriate? Considering for example that they are interviews with the subjects themselves? Thanks and I appreciate your patience. Poodledog (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, it has been explained to you numerous times since 2007. You know this because the last time I pointed that out you decided to delete the entire conversation. The "dead links" you are replacing were put there by you ([1], [2], and [3]) so don't pretend you are just helping out by updating dead links. Helpsome (talk) 01:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, helpsome. I did add those original links to those pages, but they were live at the time. They're to a student radio program at the University of Toronto, which I think did a great job connecting with academics and notable people about the environment. The original host site has since gone down, and I thought it would be great if those interviews were still accessible to a wider audience. Wikipedia enables that wider reach and accessibility. And I did read your links and those of JaconaFrere. Thank you! They were helpful! But they don't explain why you removed my recent edits. And I didn't delete the message to hide anything. In fact I thought JaconaFrere restored it. I could if you like. Thanks again for your attention to this! Poodledog (talk) 02:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I seriously can't explain this any clearer. Your additions of links have been reverted since 2007 with the exact same warnings and explanations given. You know why because the policies have been explained numerous times. You keep deleting them, but they were still explained to you. Helpsome (talk) 02:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi helpsome, I haven't deleted any warnings or explanations, helpsome. Indeed, my links on pages like Nasr, Naess, and others haven't been reverted till I tried to replace them with live links. The only warnings and explanations I received were from you and JaconaFrere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poodledog (talkcontribs) 02:13, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Really? Then how would you explain this edit? Or this one? Or blanking this whole section on my talk page? And here is your first warning from 2007 and it deals with adding those first links. Literally everything you just said is untrue. You have had eight years to learn policy. Please stop spamming. Helpsome (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, helpsome. I did delete those messages, but I delete all my messages. And I'm not sure what you think is in them that I need to hide. I was not intending to deceive or hide anything! I know nothing is deleted here anyways. And I will have to look that 2007 warning up. I don't remember challenging it though. At any rate, I am sorry for this! I will have to perhaps learn more about using this site effectively! I did not mean to spam or antagonize! Thanks for your attention. My only concern right now are those recent links you removed. I didn't think they were spam! Best Regards, Poodledog (talk) 02:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

So you didn't delete any warnings except you did delete your warnings? And you delete "all your messages" except the ones that are still there that you have never deleted. You can easily look up the 2007 warning because it is the only one you haven't deleted. Helpsome (talk) 02:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi helpsome, I deleted those initial messages between us and between JaconaFrere and me. You've added links above to our conversation, which is good. And I think my conversation with Jaconafrere was already restored. And I will not remove this conversation. I do not remember deleting any other warnings. At any rate, I must sign off now. Poodledog (talk) 03:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


Mr. Helpsome, i thank you for removing it. i was not so much sure, but i wrote it, sorry for that. -Lalit Jena — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalit Jena (talkcontribs) 12:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. But I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm leaving the link below so that you can add the information. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Still young 11 (talkcontribs) 09:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Post-presidency of Bill Clinton[edit]

Hi, Helpsome. You took off my description of Pres. Clinton's attorney discipline for lack of sources, while I was gathering them. First one is Illinois Public Media, Amy Guita, May 29, 2000, Legal Issues in the News. Second one is Duncan Campbell, Oct. 1, 2000, "Lewinsky Scandal Ends as Clinton is Disbarred," Third: Gary North,, "Lost Law Licenses," Sept. 8, 2012.

It was unreferenced and filled with editorial writing like "it would be one more blow to his character". Helpsome (talk) 20:49, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Pages semi-protected[edit]

Helpsome, I just wanted to let you know that I semi-protected the two pages related to the AIV reports you recently made rather than blocking the IPs. If any additional IPs show up elsewhere to continue the same disruptive editing, please let me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Helpsome (talk) 16:01, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Now this page is semi-protected for awhile. I'm sorry that you have to deal with someone like this. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry that everything escalated like this! Does this happen often to editors? Thank you for watching out for this. Helpsome (talk) 16:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
No, it doesn't happen very often. I need to go offline for now, so please report any further problems to WP:ANI and another admin can help. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
OK. Thanks again. Helpsome (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/JarlaxleArtemis. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:42, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Wow Helpsome (talk) 16:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yep. Some people don't have anything better to do than to go around harassing people, and this is one of those people. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:31, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 19 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2014 (UTC)


You're welcome! Please see When to use rollback and let me know if you have any questions using it. Regards– Gilliam (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes for a happy holiday season[edit]

Kawase Hasui-No Series-Snowy Inokashira Benten.jpg

JimRenge (talk) 18:46, 23 December 2014 (UTC) (talk) 09:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)==Question==

Hi Helpsome, I saw your comment and was confused about how a wikihow link could be spammy. Could you enlighten me? Ashsickle (talk) 15:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:ELNO lists links to be avoided and that includes number 12, open wikis which wikihow is. Further, you added the link in multiple places which certainly seems promotional. Helpsome (talk) 15:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for that clarification. My intention was not promotional, just trying to improve the page. As a fairly new user I appreciate your feedback and guidance. Best, Ashsickle (talk) 15:23, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Mark Levin[edit]

Hi Helpsome,

On Aug. 2014 and on Jan. 2015 I have tried to add my new book on modular system design (without success):

Mark Sh. Levin, Modular System Design and Evaluation. Springer, 2015.

Now, this material is the best one for modular system design, for morphological analysis/design, for configuration system design.

This is crucial for several Wikipedia sites/articles: ()System Design ()Modular Design ()Configuration design ()Morphological analysis (problem solving)

Before (Aug. 2014), my references (to two books at Springer: 1998, 2006; to my site with description of my course on Sytem Design) were included into the above-mentioned articles and it was iseful for readers.

Wy my materials were deleted? It is not Ok for readers.

Generally, You are not responsable to delete my materials from the CS/IT and Engineering/Management Science.


Mark Sh. Levin

You are repeatedly adding your own books to articles which is a conflict of interest. In many instances you have dishonestly added them as "references" even though they weren't used to reference the article. By your own admission here you are trying to introduce people to your books but wikipedia is not used for advertising. Helpsome (talk) 15:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not remove citations or information sourced through citations simply because a link to a source is not working, as you did to Lucy Lightfoot. Dead links should not be deleted. Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. Often, a live substitute link can be found. Links not used as references, notes or citations are not as important, such as those listed in the "External links" or "Further reading" sections, but bad links in those sections should also be fixed if possible. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Auric talk 20:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Eleventh Hour (branding), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Eleventh Hour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Buddhist influences on Christianity[edit]

Thanks for the feedback and you are right, I should get alternative sources before making the change. I don't want to create controversy, but I would like the article to read better. Lipsquid (talk) 16:52, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Adding nutrition values[edit]

Adding nutrition Values to Turkish Cousine Foods. And wikipedia warns me that it may be a spam. What do i have to do to contribute? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:35, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Every single one of your edits solely consists of adding a link to that one turkish website. Do you have an affiliation with that website? Helpsome (talk) 12:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
i am not affiliated with that website. i am a dietitian in istanbul trying to contribute to turkish cousine. Diyetkolik is the biggest diet and nutrition information website for turkish foods and its highly trusted here. That calorie values are entered manualy to that website by dietitians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:56, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
The fact that all of your edits have been adding links to that one site and nothing else looks like citation spam. Also, this is the english wikipedia so a website entirely in turkish isn't helpful to the majority of readers here. Helpsome (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, and Helpsome,
Thanks for your contributions.
We don't generally include calorie and nutrition values for prepared foods (as opposed to individual ingredients) because they vary too much. Different recipes for, say, baklava, may include much more or much less butter, different ratios of yufka/filo to filling, different kinds of nuts, etc. The same is true for all the other prepared foods. Even something as simple as tarhana may have different kinds of milk, different milk/yogurt-to-grain ratios, etc. -- and of course tarhana çorbası will vary even more, depending on what liquid is used and in what proportions. --Macrakis (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining that to us both. Helpsome (talk) 18:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Hannah Mather Crocker[edit]

Thanks for pointing that out. I found a slightly longer extract and used that instead. Sort of hoping the whole pamphlet will turn up on the net, as it's well out of copyright. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the link - that was the "slightly longer extract" mentioned above. I'm waiting for some public spirited citizen to upload the whole thing. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Anarchist Music[edit]

Hi. You are now in violation of the WP:3RR rule. Might I suggest you self revert? You don't seem to be understanding the guidelines. Your last comment is precisely why they shouldn't be included in the list. They do not meet notability guidelines on their own, therefore they should not be included in a list. Onel5969 (talk) 14:03, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

God in Buddhism[edit]

Have proposed edit on talk section for page of subject header. Will undo your reinsert of sentence unless I hear otherwise. Open to revision, but as written sentence claims too much for reasons already given. Gassho. Lotuslaw (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)Lotuslaw Lotuslaw (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

What you deleted is referenced and has been in that article for a while now. As of right now only you are pushing for removal. Helpsome (talk) 22:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The citations do not support the proposition that the relief of stress is the "sole aim of spiritual practice." Further, I've cited the Lotus Sutra as one example to the contrary. The 4 Bodisattva Vows are another example. The fact that something has been around for some time is irrelevant. Lotuslaw (talk) 15:57, 22 February 2015 (UTC)LotuslawLotuslaw (talk) 15:57, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

You started something on the talk page, waited a day or so and then decided to unilaterally do what you wanted to do anyway. That is the opposite of consensus. That isn't a high traffic page so it takes more than two days for people to see the talk page. Helpsome (talk) 18:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Respectfully, I am not trying to "start something." I'm happy to leave the proposal up longer if that is what you want. I will leave as a proposal for a week. Meanwhile I respectfully ask that you not accuse me of dishonesty. I do not think the sentence in the article is supported by the sutra quotes. I again refer you to the footnote 14 from the citation itself, which proves the statement isn't universally true even in Threvedian schools. I've seen no argument or reasoning to support the statement that the sole aim of spiritual practice for all Buddhists is the relief of stress. That is not a fair representation of all Buddhism. Lotuslaw (talk) 20:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)LotuslawLotuslaw (talk) 20:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)


How was this spam? It seems relevant to me. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 09:49, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Shankara1000 edits to wikipedia have almost solely consisted of adding book written by Richard H. Jones to numerous articles. They don't add content, just slip these in as "references" or "further reading" in a bunch of articles. Helpsome (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Nubian wild ass[edit]


I received your message that you have restored the content for the information on Nubian Wild Ass. The reason provided yesterday still holds true. I have hence again removed the content. (The information provided over Nubian wild ass was incorrect and especially the information over the donkeys of Bonaire and claim that they belong to the Nubian wild ass are incorrect). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:45, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

What you did was delete the entire article even though it was referenced. Helpsome (talk) 14:11, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Bitcoin ATM[edit]

Would it make more sense to place the link in the ATM manufacturers section? It seems overkill to make an entirely separate page for Bitcoin ATM software, so a link there or at the bottom seems to be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redbird is (talkcontribs) 17:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

No it is spam. It doesn't belong in any section of the article. Helpsome (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. Do you think we should delete the whole section on manufacturers then?

The list is incomplete anyway. There are a few more companies that should be added in as well. Redbird is (talk) 22:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

To clarify - I agree about the external links section at the bottom. Makes sense that it is not needed in this case for the reason you describe. I'll spend some time combing through the article as it seems there are a few outstanding issues with that page. Cheers Redbird is (talk) 22:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Obviously, I am not the only one and we have policy on our side. Also, all of your edits appear to be adding external links to articles and all are for Canadian companies. Do you have a conflict of interest here? Helpsome (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Iris cat.jpg

Thank you for reporting those users to the notice board!

Saturn star (talk) 19:18, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Cherry picker info[edit]

Afternoon Helpsome,

Thanks for the message. I believe the info I was trying to place in 'cherry picker' has been removed by yourself I believe as spam. The page in question is an A-Z Glossary of Powered Access Terms (which 'cherry picker' is a slang term of). If I've entered it incorrectly in terms of protocol then please accept my apologies but I think you'll find that the resource page is an exhaustive list if cherry picker terms. I would request that you reconsider. Regards Guy Willett — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monjty44 (talkcontribs) 11:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

You have yet to edit an article where you didn't add a link to that website. It is blatantly promotional as it is a rental agency. Please stop. Helpsome (talk) 11:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Spam from the monster book[edit]

Hi Helpsome, what's the story with your numerous reverts with edit comment "spam from Billywcollins"? I see that the editor is putting (his own perhaps?) book everywhere, but they do seem to be valid references, and the book checks out: Monsters in America: Our Historical Obsessions with the Hideous and the Haunting. Prhartcom (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

That editor's sole edits until the last three were to add that book to articles. It is reference spam. He was also adding amazon links to the book in external links but those had already been removed. The additions were blatantly promotional. Helpsome (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
The amazon links would be spam all right. Is it the author making the edits? How did you find out? I suppose just by their behavior. If so, that would be wrong per WP:REFSPAM. I see you're pretty good and tracking down this kind of thing and getting rid of it. But to me, the confusing thing is when, looking at it from a different point of view, the book is legit and the reference is correct and the reference is an improvement to the article. The first article I came across seemed like a legit improvement (like this diff). Thanks for your reply. Prhartcom (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I was actually trying to trace the source of some different spam when I stumbled onto [[Special:Contributions/Billywcollins|Billycollins'] edits. I understand how it might look at first which is why I put a link to Billycollins' contributions in the edit summary. Literally all of their edits except four are to add this book to articles under the guise of referencing it. Half of them are just surreptitiously adding the book under "further reading" or the reference section without it actually referencing anything at all. Helpsome (talk) 18:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
But the other half? You see what I'm getting at. Maybe we shouldn't revert the edit if it is an inline reference supporting a specific point that the book clearly covers and the edit is arguably improving the article? Like maybe only a couple of this guy's edits. Thanks for your reply. Prhartcom (talk) 18:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I understand, but when 99% of edits are to add a single book to loads of articles, the intent is clear: it is spam. Spam should be reverted. If somebody not associated with that book or editor independently feels that the book would make a good reference, they are more than welcome to add it. Here someone readded it and I didn't remove it again. Helpsome (talk) 18:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I understand now, that sounds right. Even if you reverted something that really did improve the article, the circumstances that added the citation that could help people show that the intent, while helpful, is dishonorable. Keep up the good work. P.S. Don't you want a user page? Prhartcom (talk) 18:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
The redlink stands out more so I can find my comments faster. :) Helpsome (talk) 18:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Minor Barnstar Hires.png The Minor barnstar
For tirelessly and diligently removing WP:REFSPAM. Keep up the good work. Prhartcom (talk) 18:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Helpsome (talk) 18:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Dear helpsome, I am at a bit of a loss as to why you've removed indiscriminately pretty much every link I've posted. The interviews are with or about the people identified on the wiki page, or about the issue listed on the wiki page. They do not advertise or promote any product or site. I've read the wiki pillars and cannot understand why you've removed my links. Why remove Nasr interview from Nasr site? Why remove Miner interview from Miner site? Indeed the Nasr interview has been up since the interview originally aired in 2007. Indeed with some of your edits you reverted from my live link to a dead link, which originally led to the same interview (e.g. Naess, Deep ecology, Nasr). In future, I agree with you that I need to be more selective in my postings. My apologies. I am new to wikipedia. However, I felt that you removed too many of my postings--postings which are immediately relevant to the topic identified. I reposted select links to immediately relevant sites (e.g. Nasr to Nasr). If you disagree, please let me know. I will not engage in an "editwar," which means if you continue to remove all my links, I will not repost them. Thanks for your attention. Kindly, Poodledog (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Some relevant links: Wikipedia:External_links#Linking_to_user-submitted_video_sites, Wikipedia:Spam#Videos, Wikipedia:Video_links. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

From your very first edits dating back to 2007, you have been warned that Wikipedia is not a collection of links. You are not "new to wikipedia" and the policy has been explained to you by multiple editors. Helpsome (talk) 18:27, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear helpsome, Thanks for your feedback. But note that the link on Arne Naess that you reverted to is dead. I was trying to replace it with a live link to the same interview. The host site no longer hosts the interviews. I was trying to replace live links on pages that hosted them before, albeit using youtube which I guess is a mistake. I'll leave it be then. And although I posted on wiki a while back, I haven't really been on it since. I've only run into difficulty posting these youtube videos! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poodledog (talkcontribs) 19:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

ani section retitled[edit]

Hi Helpsome -- I hope you don't mind that I have just retitled an ANI section that you had opened, to convert from a somewhat loaded label to wp:ANI#User:Haffy881 and copyright issues, a neutral label more compliant with guideline wp:TALKNEW. Please understand I have nothing against you, that I have similarly re-titled other ANI section titles recently, and that I regard your title choice as within usual recent practice. It's just that I am hoping to change, with others, what is usual practice. I have no involvement with the topic or parties involved in the specific ANI discussion, and I don't mean to disrupt that discussion by making this small, separate point. sincerely, --doncram 21:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Traveler (novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minority Report (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Deleted text on Weka page[edit]

You have deleted the link to SPMF on the weka page. Why ? SPMF is a well-known data mining library used in more than 160 research papers (see SPMF website - citations page), and has many users (more than than 70,000 visitors to the website last year), and was also reviewed in published in a famous peer reviewed machine learning journal (Journal of Machine Learning Research). It is thus relevant to mention that it as a data mining library that is an alternative to Weka. If you have a problem with the writting style, you can edit the text but it should not be deleted. Please revert that delete.

Please read WP:SPAM, WP:EL, and WP:COI. Numerous editors have reverted your promotional additions so please stop and familiarize yourself with policy. Helpsome (talk) 01:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
I have posted the description on DBScan, K-Means and Weka pages and they were initially reverted by the same IP address. From what I understand the person who has reverted the text initially did it because he did not like the writting style and deemed it as "advertisement". I have put it back and rewritten it differently and then you and someone else reverted it. However, can you tell me why SPMF does not deserve to be on these pages? As I said above, it is a popular data mining library. It has been cited in more than 160 research papers. Is there a problem with relevancy or with the writting style?
I gave you links to the relevant guidelines. Please read them. Helpsome (talk) 01:51, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
I have checked quickly. And from these pages, it seems that the problem is someone posting link to hisown software, which is more about how to properly add a link to wikipedia by discussing on talk page etc.. But still, I think that the software should meet the notability requirement. You think that it does not meet the notability requirement?
Please don't check quickly, actually read them through. Here are the notability guidelines. Helpsome (talk) 02:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
If have read the notability guidelines for software a few days ago and in my opinion, it meets them: "The software is discussed in reliable sources as significant in its particular field." --> cited in 160 research papers related to data mining. "The software is the subject of multiple printed third party manuals, instruction books, or reliable reviews" --> it has been rewiewed and published in a top machine learning journal (JMLR) and published in the open-source track of that journal. So I think that it should be added back — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:09, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
What you linked to explicitly says "Rather, the purpose of a notability guideline is to provide guidance for deciding when a topic warrants a page of its own." You weren't creating a new article, you were adding links to multiple articles. Please read WP:SPAM, WP:EL, and WP:COI. Helpsome (talk) 02:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Still, I read the External Link page and the main problem raised seems to be about posting a link to his own page. But beside that the link is totally relevant to the page where it was posted. For example, in the K-Means page, the link is relevant because it provide an open-source Java K-Means implementation, which is useful for someone reading the article who want to try the algorithm. For the other 16 or 17 criteria, i don't see any problem. So, what should I do to have it put back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Then read WP:SPAM again. From WP:LINKSPAM: "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." Helpsome (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

So, you seem to mean that one should not add a link to his own website but wait that someone else link to it instead? or perhaps "But if the above advice makes you concerned that others will regard your contribution as spam, you can find out without taking that risk: describe your work on the article's talk page, asking other editors if it is relevant". So that what you think I should do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
If you need to ask me if you shouldn't add a link to your own website, I'm finding it hard to believe you read any of the guidelines I linked to. No, do not add links to your own website. Please read WP:SPAM, WP:EL, and WP:COI. Helpsome (talk) 02:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Ok. so then from my understanding of what I read and what you are telling me, the solution is to just wait that someone else add the link to the software, instead of doing anything else.
The solution is that if others editors decide it is worthy of inclusion it might be added at a later date. But please stop attempting to use wikipedia to promote your website. Helpsome (talk) 02:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Ok. then, I'll just forget about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Andrulla Blanchette[edit]

I updated certain info. Which is totally true and correct. Please restore my updates. Feel free to discuss with me. WHITEROSE888 (talk) 03:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

  • I've reverted edits by WHITEROSE888, asked for the account to be blocked, and requested help at the BLP noticeboard. WHITEROSE, you've continued to remove content that is sourced, much of it from an interview with the article's subject, and replaced it with poorly written, unsourced claims. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that requires basic attention to scholarship, we're not allowed to add information that we believe is true--even if it's about us or people we know--unless it's referenced to a reliable published source. At no time have you stopped to read the guidelines or consider this. Thanks, 2602:302:D89:A9C9:84E6:720C:31CA:6D3 (talk) 03:13, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for your help earlier. I am new to Wikipedia as a contributor. I managed to delete an entire section and couldn't get it back! I also now know how to create references :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daenelle James (talkcontribs) 10:06, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Ray Fowler - died today[edit]

Hello there - it's too early for Dr Fowler's death to have made the media. Do you have access to CaringBridge?

His wife wrote this: Untitled By Sandy Fowler — 9 hours ago

We said goodbye tonight. He is at peace.

Epitaph on a Friend

An honest man here lies at rest,

The friend of man, the friend of truth,

The friend of age, and guide of youth:

Few hearts like his, with virtue warm'd,

Few heads with knowledge so inform'd;

If there's another world, he lives in bliss;

If there is none, he made the best of this.

Robert Burns (talk) 14:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't use primary sources and it must be verifiable for people reading and editing the encyclopedia. If someone needs an account to access the information, it isn't accessible to readers. Helpsome (talk) 15:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

August Perk[edit]

Johnny de Brest is the Son of Maria Perk, Daughter of August Perk, married to Günter Enkrodt, Father of Johnny de Brest (German Given Name Olaf Enkrodt) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoWikiSabotage (talkcontribs) 17:24, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

No matter how many accounts you use (NoWikiSabotage or NoSabotage) you can't avoid the fact that you have been told this information isn't referenced and doesn't belong here. Helpsome (talk) 17:26, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Added more accurate data[edit]

I received you warning. However, your practices are not honest. You cannot promote business that sell services, such as the ANNA Service Bureau which charges $10,000 or more per year to access their database when the ISIN Organization is FREE to search their database.

I will also report this to wiki authorities as this is unfair monopolistic practices. ISIN codes are an open source, free service for all and the ISIN Organization people do not charge for ISIN database look up service, but the other people you quote do!!! You are promoting a massive conglomerate company run by S&P. You speak of SPAM and promotion: this is what his page is. If this was a free service than no one would care, but they charge lots of money.

Stop deleting these postings.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

You are spamming. If you continue to promote your website on wikipedia you risk being blocked. Please stop. Helpsome (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For the tireless copy-editing of so many pages! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:00, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Om Ma Ni Padme Hum[edit]

Om Ma Ni Padme Hum is a Tibetan/ Sankrit chant. The Wikipedia page has references to literature , music and other popular culture where such chants were used. Although I don't probably give it too much importance whether an addition be made to the page... I find the reverting of my edits very meaningless. Either Let me know where does this fit as 'soapboxing or promotion of content' , or leave the edit as it is. You may validate them and remove if required , I do not suppose this can be treated as promotion of content.

Youtube reference for you Google search references

Let me know you views, if you are planning to revert my edit again, please provide sufficient reasons rather than a 'you will be blocked on wikipedia'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjunshrivatsan (talkcontribs) 06:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I have done so. Your edits are promotional in nature and don't belong on wikipedia. Please stop. Helpsome (talk) 08:59, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

" I have done so " is not really an explanation. Explain why my edit is promotional! All you are doing is , remove a valid reference and then tell me I will be blocked. I have read wikipedia articles , and this does not constitute promotion of content. If that is the case, Please remove the entire MUSIC section in the page..and the MOVIES section...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjunshrivatsan (talkcontribs) 12:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

You have not added a "valid reference". Please read WP:RS for guidelines about reliable sources. A non-notable band's own soundcloud page does not qualify. The other entries on that page have article and those articles are reliably sourced. Helpsome (talk) 14:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


Hey, Helpsome first off I want to thank you. I am new to Wikipedia and am still figuring out how all this works. With that in mind, this product that I am trying to put on the Raspberry Pi page (Piper) is a product that I feel resonates well with the page. However, I am learning about not adding promotional content, but at the same time, I strong feel that this is a project that is relevant to Raspberry Pi and DIY. If there is any way you could help me include that inside the webpages, without making it promotional in any way, shape, or form, I would greatly appreciate it. Talati.rishi (talk) 15:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)Talati.rishi