User talk:Atsme

'You are out of line, my friend. I have followed Wiki guidelines for EXTERNAL LINKS. It is not promotional in nature, rather it is EDUCATIONAL. A link to non-profit educational institution IS NOT PROMOTIONAL.

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Paddlefish ‎. 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. Kuru (talk) 02:32, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

"Sorry, but you are misinformed. The link to Earthwave Society meets the guidelines as set forth by WIKIPEDIA. Have you even read the guidelines? If so, please send me the exact quote from the Wiki Guidelines that state my link is unacceptable, and why. It appears you have your own perception of what purpose external links are to serve, which is why I have contacted two Administrators to resolve this issue. The link I added to the Paddlefish site happens to be a link to a very important resource for students, teachers, and researchers. I'm not here to play games with you. There is extremely important information on the Earthwave website that needs to be included as an external link on the relevant Wikipedia pages. I tried to modify the link in an effort to avoid further confrontation you, but nothing seems to work. If you are bored, and need something to do, why don't you pick on the thousands of other sites on Wikipedia that have external links to sites that truly are commercialized, and promotional instead of picking on a legitimate non-profit organization's site that actually has, and still is doing some good in the area of conservation and endangered species. The video documentation we provide is NOT FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES. They are VIDEO DOCUMENTARIES meaning they actually DOCUMENT THE LIFE HISTORY CYCLE OF A PARTICULAR SPECIES LIKE THE PADDLEFISH. Most are one hour long with no ads or commercial breaks because they are DOCUMENTARIES, and contains information and rare copyrighted footage that researchers won't find anywhere else. Earthwave Society and it's Board of Directors are not concerned about search engine rankings - we are already have top ranking, and have been since 1992. We are educators not retailers. Your misguided efforts have tripled my work load this evening, and have prevented me from getting important work done - work that is needed in conservation education - work that could potentially save an entire species. I don't mean to sound impolite, but don't you have something more constructive to do with your spare time? Atsme (talk) 05:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Link additions

• earthwave.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, 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. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:21, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Atsme. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. MER-C 11:58, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

earthwave.org and Sturgeon, Crayfish, etc

I am unsure how often you check your e-mail inbox, and in any case this should be recorded publicly, so here is my response to your e-mail dated 13:46 12 September 2011 (UTC):

Thank you for contacting User:JeremyA and User:Kevmin. If an editor

does something on Wikipedia that you disagree with, the first course

of action is always to contact him or her directly. Now that you have

did so, I can look into the matter and give my view.



Having looked at the website you are trying to link to, I must say

that I agree with Jeremy and Kevmin. Wikipedia has very strict

guidelines, set down at at

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#What_to_link>,

about what external links can be included in its articles. If you read

that link, and especially under 'Links normally to be avoided' that

"Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the

article would contain if it became a featured article." Wikipedia also

has guidelines about what sources we can use by means of verification

of the contents of our articles, set down at

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources>.

I am sure that your website is strictly educational in nature, but I

regret that it cannot be accepted as a source because of §3.1

'Questionable sources'.



As with anything from 'Naturalis Historia' to 'Encyclopedia

Britannica', Wikipedia is a formal encyclopedia, and there is an

exceptionally high bar for what material and sources we can use to

validate the contents of articles. Jeremy and Kevmin reverted your

edits because the link you were trying to include, with the greatest

respect, did not meet these standards.



Perhaps you might use your knowledge in this field to instead develop

the contents of Wikipedia, rather than by adding links to

earthwave.org. We would certainly welcome your contributions!



Please let me know if you have any further queries.



Regards,

Anthony

Regards, AGK [•] 17:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC)