User talk:98.163.75.189: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:55, 29 August 2011

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Help pages
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (98.163.75.189) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) 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 this page. Again, welcome! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page William Neill (poet) has been reverted.
Your edit here to William Neill (poet) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4mbgd4sHq8) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Carrow Abbey, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:12, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Carrow Abbey. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

on the contrary your deletion of references proving notability is disruptive, take to ANI. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 01:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Carrow Abbey, you may be blocked from editing. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Carrow Abbey, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting definition of vandalism. I have no problem with the IP's edits. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:32, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nor I, with respect to the ones in this article. He added relevant information & sources. and removed a speedy tag. He was not the original editor of the article, which had begun un very incomplete form by another editor 6 months earlier. DGG ( talk ) 03:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 98.163.75.189. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 01:35, 5 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:35, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 98.163.75.189. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 01:37, 5 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:37, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your saving the abbey

Its very rare that anyone ever thanks an IP anymore, but thank you for proving me wrong in deleting speedily. hewhoamareismyself 01:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't consider stubs ugly, I consider pages that can never be found because they do not belong to a stub type or project, so they can't be assessed in any way. Those disturb me because there is no way to even get to them to fix them, that needs to be taken care of first before any stubs, or at least in my eyes. Whats worse is that there are 400,000+ of them. Even worse is that "orphan" isn't used enough to fix them most of the time That's what I was working on, when I stumbled on Carrow Abbey, I gave it a stub, gave it a project, then decided that there was pretty much no point in having a one line article. Good luck with whatever you are doing, hopefully I can get some people to work on my things. hewhoamareismyself 01:53, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		message hewhoamareismyself 01:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Thomas

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Jim Thomas (poet) 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Jim Thomas (poet) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://kitticarriker.blogspot.com/2009/04/yet-another-uncanny-literary.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 17:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

bad bot reverting 3 references for 1 el. and not adding a header with the warning. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adib Khan

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Adib Khan. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it.
Your edit here to Adib Khan was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://jessicamudditt.wordpress.com/2010/04/23/a-review-of-adib-khans-seasonal-adjustments/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 03:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

"3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject" we apparently have diametrically opposed views of appropriate. therefore i will revert you. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 03:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Adib Khan with this edit. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. N^oformation ^Talk 04:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no, this link is an appropriate review of the author's work. it meets the el guidelines. the presumption that by adding the link, i am trying to drive traffic to this blog, is not an assumption of good faith. stop it. stop spamming my talk page. is this bot an attempt to circumvent the blacklist, and its due process? i.e. if you have concerns about this blog, take them to the blacklist. is this bot targeted at ip editors only? is that not a presumption of bad faith from ip editors? given the lack of consensus over the use of this bot at Wikipedia talk:External links, i will look forward to challanging your blocks. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Palacios

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Alexander Palacios with this edit 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. N^oformation ^Talk 00:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

deleting references, in order to delete links is disruptive. stop it. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 12:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar Award

		The Original Barnstar
		It's my pleasure to award you an original barnstar for your good work on referencing numerous articles. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

advice

I think you are often doing good work here, but I want to remind you of some of our practices. Blogs are not usually acceptable sources for information used to indicate notability, unless by recognized authorities. They are, in particular, not good sources for reviews. Material on Youtube is almost never an acceptable source, for any purpose. Reviews and other information should best come from published newspapers, books, or magazines, whether or not available on the web. A real effort would be made to find good sources. For preliminary work, I find Google News Archive very helpful for easy access to recent material, and Google Books for older. But be aware the Google News includes many press release sources that we do not consider acceptable. It is up to you to choose carefully. Sometimes it is necessary to use Google, but great caution should be used with material found there. A library can be very helpful, and any librarian will assist you--they all know about Wikipedia , and many of them are fascinated by it--they can also help you get free copies of material that may be behind a paywall. The best place for our policy on sourcing is WP:Reliable sources; you can ask about any you are not sure of on WP:RSN, the reliable sources noticeboard.

I urge you to get a user account--feel free to use any pseudonym you choose. and perhaps add some information about yourself--you are likely to be taken more seriously here. You can then also register an email address, which will be kept confidential, and you will be able to send emails to me and other editors from the links on our user pages that you will then find there. But do continue working; work carefully, and you will have fewer problems. If you should get into difficulties, please feel free to ask for assistance on my user talk page. DGG ( talk ) 03:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for stopping by, and the advice. you're probably right.

about the links. for blogs, i tend to go by the quality of the writing. if an author uploads a review to their blog that was published elsewhere, isn't that fine? i prefer newspaper reviews, but the british papers can't cover everything. i won't link to myspace or facebook, i will rarely to utube, when it's an author reading, or interview. i find author primary material to be an important source, be it published interview or video. i will include a press release, if i can't find better. i've probably overdone it in cases, and need to look harder. the quality of the ref does go to notability, but something is better than nothing. the time pressure of a prod or speedy precludes a better search; others may come along who are better at it anyway (carrow abbey). this eldeletebot has some problems, why is it allowed to run?

the more ip's get deprecated, the more i want to be one: "encyclopedia anyone can edit" indeed. it's unclear to me how "serious" a pseudonym gets treated, witness your talk page. i looked at the hierarchy of users, i don't see any tools i want. i kinda like the CAPTCHA: it's giving me lots of vocabulary words for some automatic poetry.98.163.75.189 (talk) 16:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation

Hello, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking - when was the AfD improperly reopened? Cheers, m.o.p 13:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[1]98.163.75.189 (talk) 21:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Killian Donnelly 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Killian Donnelly was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://janephob.blogspot.com/2011/01/review-direct-from-west-end.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 14:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

if you have a problem with the theater review blog, take it to the blacklist.98.163.75.189 (talk) 14:15, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to David Adjmi. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it.
Your edit here to David Adjmi was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://aszym.blogspot.com/2009/06/i-interview-playwrights-part-5-david.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 22:49, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

see principles above. interview with playwright is good primary source material, perfectly acceptable as an external link. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 22:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Clint Ballinger with this edit. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. N^oformation ^Talk 03:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

official websites are not spam. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 03:09, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you harm Wikipedia, as you did at Clint Ballinger with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. N^oformation ^Talk 03:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EX links

Why do you think that link is appropriate for the Clint Ballinger article? To me it seems like spam which is why I reverted it, but I'm willing to listen to a reason for inclusion if you have one. Also, removing spam, even if incorrect, is not WP:VANDALISM, which has a very specific definition, so I would appreciate it if you wouldn't refer to an edit as vandalism unless it is actually vandalism. Thank you. N^oformation ^Talk 03:15, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i call it as i see it. this website is the article subject's website. why do you call it spam, without evidence? a block from you would be a badge of honor. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 03:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked for a third opinion and will no long revert these links. N^oformation ^Talk 03:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this is an academic discussion, since the article does not have references. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 03:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Kaitlin Antonneau 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Kaitlin Antonneau was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://twitter.com/#!/kaitieantonneau) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

see advice above. primary source material is a proper EL. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 16:08, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Michael Slackman. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it.
Your edit here to Michael Slackman was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://seanleviashvili.wordpress.com/2009/05/25/michael-slackman/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

see advice above: interview with journalist; confirming cairo bureau. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 16:31, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Eros Araújo with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 16:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

it is a referenced article, therefore prod does not apply; a simple google translate confirms that the Portuguese sources are correct. if you have notability concerns take them to AfD. your false warnings are disruptive. i welcome your block as a badge of honor. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that the BLP prod does not apply now that the article has been sourced. Anyone is entitled to remove a BLP Prod tag is such circumstances. However, you called the re-saddition of the tag "vandalism" in the edit summary, which is not appropriate for a simple error like that. Please do not talk in that way to other Wikipedia contributors. As one of the admins who regularly patrols BLP prod, I must tell you that this is not an appropriate attitude, even when you are right about the matter at issue. DGG ( talk ) 02:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you are quite right, reversion under false pretensions is really a failure of wp:agf, not vandalism. it is not a simple error: it is an assumption that the bot is correct and the ip is not. it is quite instructive how ip's are treated. how many false warnings can i collect? when is the abuse of new editors going to stop? i'd say my "attitude" is a learned behavior. you can be good cop, i'll take the other. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 02:53, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been checking some of your contributions disputed above; I find that many of them are good, and some of the one removed by the various bots were improper actions by the bots. But there is only one what to deal with this, which is to remain calm about it. There's an informal rule here, that the person who loses his temper loses.vIn particular, the charge of "vandalism " implies malice aforethought to harm the encyclopedia, such and is simply not the in any of the actions involved here. If you throw this charge at people, they are sure to resent it, and will act in accordance with their resentment. The way to deal with incorrect bot tagging isto comment mildly about it on the talk page for the bot, If a bot is found to do consistently bad tagging it will be stopped. DGG ( talk ) 06:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

given the extended discussion about this bot, i can have no confidence that any comment i make would be productive. if they won't listen to you, why me? for Kaitlin Antonneau, i would have preferred an athlete's blog or webpage as primary source material EL, but will stoop to twitter (in the understanding that the bot will revert) if a real person would talk about it i would let it go. we now have the dilemma of BLP's being unsourced, because some don't trust ip's who try to source them. hilarious. form over function.

i don't care what their intent is; i didn't mean to imply anything, rather what is the outcome: did they make false statements on the talk page mischaracterizing my edits; did they add back a wrong prod and wrong speedy, that should have been obvious. if i added tags that did not apply, would it be called vandalism? managing and banning based on intent is profoundly mistaken: rather does an editor's pattern of edits add to or take away from the wiki. this jump to conclusion from a superficial screen, without looking at the facts, is destructive to the wiki.

you are right a better strategy would be killing them with kindness. you have stores of patience that i lack, however, how's it working for you? have you changed one editor's behavior? i prefer the tit for tat strategy. there are no consequences for assuming bad faith: one consequence will be a little smack of contempt on a talk page. (or a barnstar when mistakes are admitted) resentment works both ways: turnabout is fair. i am calm, but i am also contemptuous of falsehood. this is not personal attack, but attack upon false statements. i am not angry; i am saddened by the low ebb of civility. i wish i could believe in your strategy, but i do not. i understand that this will attract vengeful admins (not that i could tell the difference of intent) if i draw fire here, maybe they will abuse others less. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

actually, roughness is more likely to give them such a poor idea of what you're arguing for, that they'll think anyone else arguing for the same thing is as unreasonable as they imagine you are. In 4 years here, I have at least partially convinced some people of my way of looking at Wikipedia, but, as I've always said, I'm more concerned with convincing the new-comers. Bad as it may seem now, it was worse then. DGG ( talk ) 03:31, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i should think they're more likely to understand game theory, than public service professionalism. the bully needs to be checked first, and then enlightened. the ip was already deprecated. let's send a message. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 12:58, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kalim Hazique

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Kalim Hazique 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Kalim Hazique was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://kalimhaziq.blogspot.com/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

the link you added was a good one, and is now in the article. I'm going to try to comment on all the ones the bot notifies here from here on. DGG ( talk ) 03:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know how much "third prize in the beauty contest" goes to notability, but it does hold off the prod. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 12:58, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Frank Sanello 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Frank Sanello was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://chancelucky.blogspot.com/2006/07/opium-wars-by-travis-hanes-and-frank.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 02:56, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

see principles above, blog is an extended book review. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 03:00, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Frank Sanello 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Frank Sanello was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://twitter.com/#!/FrankSanello) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 14:45, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

see Kaitlin Antonneau above. author's twitter account, is an acceptable EL to author page. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 14:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

speaking of Frank Sanello, has wikipedia become like HP hub? hubpages.com/forum/topic/80975 98.163.75.189 (talk) 15:16, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment yes, two more incorrect notices from this rather crudely written bot. (not there would necessarily be a way to write it correctly--the only correct way would be for the bot to spot possible problems, but for a human to check before issuing the notices. There are after all a great many incorrect links added--I've removed many hundreds of them. Manually. After seeing them in manual editing, un-bot assisted. DGG ( talk ) 01:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sanello was on the edge of promotional; i left off his blog rant, which might be unflattering. is the prolific ghost writer notable? i am indifferent. you see he was banned from HP hub because of his controversial speech "concerns"; does wikipedia have the same corporate impulse? you are swimming against the tide of blithe, instant gratification, software solutions. they are not yet prepared to adopt your professionalism. hope they will before it's too late. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 18:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Alexandrea Weis 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Alexandrea Weis was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://blogcritics.org/books/article/interview-alexandrea-weis-author-of-recovery/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:14, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

interview is fine primary source material, although it might be duplicative. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Alexandrea Weis 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Alexandrea Weis was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://twitter.com/#!/alexandreaweis) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 13:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

author's twitter, notability is a problem however.98.163.75.189 (talk) 13:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Sam Bartlett. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it.
Your edit here to Sam Bartlett was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPDiyP-5oFw) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:55, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to I and the Village. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Your edit here to I and the Village was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.chagallpaintings.org/iandthevillage.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

wow, well, if a blog talks about the painting i'm inclined to include it. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 20:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're...taliking to a bot ya know... :) Dreadstar ☥ 20:21, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

it's pretending to talk to me, i'm talking to DGG. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 20:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, well, that's ok then...I have it on best authority that DGG is indeed a real live human..very useful too..so continue on! :D Dreadstar ☥ 20:28, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

if only the bots and bot makers would listen to DGG, then we would have a real encyclopedia, (and fewer false warnings). 98.163.75.189 (talk) 20:31, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did at Connor Brantley, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines.
Your edit here to Connor Brantley was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iatt5ISsog, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3XE8hfAtGQ) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 21:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

a bot block, really? reverting referencing BLP's is disruptive. MSNBC is spam really? the teen's video exposure at TED goes directly to notability, an open question. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for adding spam links. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia and potentially penalized by search engines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 5 albert square (talk) 22:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

98.163.75.189 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

did not add spam. the external links are in strict accordance with the policy.98.163.75.189 (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please read WP:ELNO, links to blogs, twitterfeeds, personal websites etc etc etc are not allowed

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

5 albert square (talk) 22:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)}}[reply]

i read it, and you are wrong, links to twitter feeds, youtube are allowed: "There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content."

WP:ELYES "What can normally be linked.

Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues,[2] amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons."

"An official link is a link to a website or other Internet service that meets both of the following:

The linked content is controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article. The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable."

i used the due care and MSNBC is not spam. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 22:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

98.163.75.189 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1- reviewing your own block, not "uninvolved". 2- WP:ELYES: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. 98.163.75.189 (talk) 22:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=1- reviewing your own block, not "uninvolved". 2- [[WP:ELYES]]: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. [[Special:Contributions/98.163.75.189|98.163.75.189]] ([[User talk:98.163.75.189#top|talk]]) 22:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=1- reviewing your own block, not "uninvolved". 2- [[WP:ELYES]]: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. [[Special:Contributions/98.163.75.189|98.163.75.189]] ([[User talk:98.163.75.189#top|talk]]) 22:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=1- reviewing your own block, not "uninvolved". 2- [[WP:ELYES]]: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. [[Special:Contributions/98.163.75.189|98.163.75.189]] ([[User talk:98.163.75.189#top|talk]]) 22:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

@@ Line 167: / Line 167: @@
 The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable."
 :i used the due care and MSNBC is not spam. [[Special:Contributions/98.163.75.189|98.163.75.189]] ([[User talk:98.163.75.189#top|talk]]) 22:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
-{{unblock| reason=[[WP:ELYES]]: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. [[Special:Contributions/98.163.75.189|98.163.75.189]] ([[User talk:98.163.75.189#top|talk]]) 22:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)}}
+{{unblock| reason=1- reviewing your own block, not "uninvolved". 2- [[WP:ELYES]]: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content. [[Special:Contributions/98.163.75.189|98.163.75.189]] ([[User talk:98.163.75.189#top|talk]]) 22:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)}}