User talk:GraemeL

I am: OUT

• I will reply here unless you ask me to reply somewhere else.
• If I posted something (other than a warning) to your talk page, I probably added it to my watch list. I would prefer replies in the same page as the original post. However, feel free to reply here if you want.

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

messages on my talk page

Thanks for the note, but I wasn't trying to indent the paragraphs. I tried to set quotes apart from my text by using a single space before the paragraph (since that places the quote in a box). However this prevented my text from wrapping to the page, so I just went with italics instead. --Ryan Wise 15:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. Glad you got the formatting sorted out. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Yikes

Sorry about that, I hate to trample on other admins that keep up with their protections. Most likely, someone requested it at RFP; I've been pretty lax about pruning through the protected pages lately! · Katefan0 ^(scribble)/poll 15:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. I'd rather somebody went through the list regularly and cleaned it out instead of having pages protected for weeks on end when a few days would have been good enough. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Pokeno website link

Sorry Graham, I saw all the other links to comercial sites and assumed it was ok. We are developing our site at the moment and will be incorporating features on pie history, facts and figures, and links to pie related material. If it includes valuable information such as this would there be any objections to posting a link then?86.144.207.225 15:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for stopping when asked. I went through the articles you edited and weeded out all of the other commercial links too. As to your future content, it would all depend on what the content was and whether it added to the information already in the articles. Best idea is to post a request asking for some opinions to the article talk page once you have expanded the content on the site. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Spam links

I have a few articles that are free and infomative, and support the specific topic addressed. I intend to refrain from adding non-reference pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.233.99.218 (talk • contribs) .

No, what you are doing is spamming. Please contribute to Wikipedia without adding external links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

How about an article about Business-to-Business Lead Generation Tactics? As a reference or external link from "lead generation"? Seems helpful to visitors. If I expand the Wikipedia entry and cite the page as a source would that help?

If you are set on using Wikipedia to direct traffic to your site, the only thing that is going to happen is that you will end up being blocked. --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Commercial Links removed.

I would like to ask why commercial links to my Chinese Clothing site were removed and not the others Commercial links.

I can be contacted on the email form in the site mentioned

Ref. See QIPAO. Several Commercial companies added their link to there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.5.163 (talk • contribs)

They were removed because I happened to catch you. There are over 1 million articles and keeping new spam from happening is a huge job without even looking at existing links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I have now removed all commercial links from the articles that you edited. --GraemeL ^(talk) 22:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

TheDailyPlate.com

Hi,

Could you please tell me why you reverted the edit for The Daily Plate.com on "calorie"? It offers much more comprehensive data than the other sites listed as external links, and seems to follow the requirements for that section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.59.144 (talk • contribs)

It doesn't add anything useful to the articles it was posted to. --GraemeL ^(talk) 23:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your fair Handling of the Chinese Clothing links.

Is there anyway i can contribure to helping stop the spread of spam links in future?

Project Management Tools

Several Wikipedia users marked the link to Project Management Tools a favorite in the brief time you allowed it to be listed. And yet you've deleted it. Wiki users seem to find it valuable.

Please reconsider, and let the Wiki population choose whether to access information they find useful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.4.130.63 (talk • contribs) .

How can you tell if people marked it as a favourite or not? The link is primarily commercial and I consider it spam. Please contribute by adding content, not external links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 18:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I can tell it is marked as a favorite when the favicon.ico file is requested. This is logged in the web log of the site. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favicon The web log also shows the wiki link was the entry point.

Please reconsider - and let the Wiki users decide. They find it valuable.

My own browser displays your favicon on the URL bar and the tab the page is opened in when I view your site and I haven't bookmarked it. Requesting the favicon has nothing to do with the page being added to favourites. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Depending on the browser, it DOES indcate the user has made it a favorite.

Here is a page with Tools for Software Engineering. Will you also be deleting these commercial links? Computer-aided software engineering

Weeding through them now. --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

And please remove these links on the Project management Page... They are all commercial links.

• www.irise.com
• http://www.effectiveprojectmanagement.com/
• http://www.itprojectstoday.com/
• www.auditserve.com

I've removed the two that I broke above. The other two don't seem to be commercial to me. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

These are commercial links http://www.projectmanagement.ie/ - note they have clients - doesn't that indicate a commercial firm? http://www.effectiveprojectmanagement.com/ - this site incorporates ads by Google. That is commercial and crass. http://www.itprojectstoday.com/ - this site has a popup ad. Again, a sign of commercialism.

The wiki guidelines on external links state these sites should not be included 1) Sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. 2) Sites with objectionable amounts of advertising The .ie site falls under 1. The other two sites fall under 2. All should be elimininated under the wiki guidelines.

The Ireland site is a professional body for members of the profession in that country and as such, merits inclusion. The guidelines state "objectionable amounts of advertising", which is subjective. In my opinion, both of the other sites provide enough useful information to offset the amount of advertising they contain. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Legal FAQ links

Sorry for the repeated posting of the links to our FAQs. My intention was not as spam, but felt that the articles being linked to included good information that were good contributions to the Wikipedia articles, and would be useful. Considering the link below mine (Internet Legal Research Group) links directly to an item for sale, I thought that linking to an information page would be acceptable.

Having had a closer look at the site, I was probably too hasty in removing the links. I will not remove them in future, though others may. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

eds

lol, it's my first time editing wikipedia so i don't want to go too crazy!

cheers,

russell

Heh, it was my bad reading of the diffs that caused the confusion in the first place. Catching the Amazon link in the text was good. Have fun editing! --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:Block

Taken care of - thanks --Jay(Reply) 20:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

News

I notice that you removed an item about Pennsylvania elections as "non-international item" but did not remove items about Fiji elections or violence in the Turkish Council of State. Please explain how the Pennsylvania item is not international but the other two are. --M@rēino 22:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I've seen both of the other items covered by the BBC. The one you added is pretty much only regional news. --GraemeL ^(talk) 23:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Though I did miss the piano story for some reason. That was certainly not international news. Somebody else removed it. --GraemeL ^(talk) 23:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

My site is not a real commercial site if you look at it. If you compare my site to the others on the external links page I don't see how those can be legit and mine is not.

Om for Hikers

Why did you remove Om For Hikers under external links? It is no different than the other sites listed under the same section! Om For Hikers is not a commercial site! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darren996 (talk • contribs) .

You are inserting links to different sites across multiple articles. However, all of these sites are obviously operated by the same individual/company. This is spamming. Please contribute content to Wikipedia instead of external links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 11:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Spam

Why then do you leave the other two links in the database. Assumably then, you are the owner of same, otherwise you'd not permit them.

Databases IafdAdult film database. Eonsex Adult movies and images database.

Hence, If they are still there in two days I can only assume that you are a fraud, or inneffective.

If wikipedia objects, they will have to email me in that case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xymptlx (talk • contribs) .

The other two sites have been agreed by consensus on the talk page of the article. You are merly trying to promote your own links. Please contribute content to Wikipedia instead of adding external links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 11:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

What to do with this user?

Hi GraemeL, I've been contributing to the pornography page for a while. Re-organized some of the latter sections so they made more sense, including creating the database section (which the comment above refers to). Had many discussions with editors to make sure that those two links were relevant. My question is this: I'm noticing Xymptlx vandalizing the databases section regularly. Can you tell me what action I can help take against this? Still kinda learning the ropes here. Thanks, Coolmojito 09:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

If commercial links are added to the article, remove them and warn the user by adding {{subst:spam1}} --~~~~ to their talk page. If they continue to add the links, use {{spam2}} and {{spam3}}. If they continue after three warnings, you can ask to have them blocked by posting to WP:AIV. Keep up the good work. --GraemeL ^(talk) 11:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Dia Mirza

Hello, GraemeL, I noticed your contributions on the Diya Mirza article. Several other editors and myself have some problmes over there, since an anon removes the changes that have been, at least by the three of us, User:Zora, User:Pa7 and myself, accepted. So I'm asking you if you could protect the page, so non-logged-in people cannot change it. Maybe the vandal adopts a user name and we can talk properly to him/her. Best regards, --Plumcouch 11:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The level of vandalism is too low to justify protecting the article at the moment. I've added the article to my watchlist to keep an eye on it for a while. If the amount of vandalism increases, I'll protect the article for a while. --GraemeL ^(talk) 11:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello Mr.Graemel.. It is not me but the Zora & other team have been vandalising the diamirza article. i've been adding information to the article and they have been removing persistently. i've no ,Malicious intent' or interest in other articles of wikipedia or your petty battles. i've added a lot of information instead of keeping it a stub. i am not interested in taking the trouble to register and fight out the differences with the other INDIAN CINEMA ' dedicated editors.

All the information i've added since i found the article is relevant, encyclopedic and worth knowing for any laymen. The 'vandal' (as some one put it)i.e me is again not interested in registering in Wikipedia. I don't understand what the article needs protection from? May be from further information. It is improper to accuse me of Vandalism' when urself and others are not interested in any 'dialogue' and joined together to 'remove' information i 've added after hardwork. It is upto u whether u want to be dictators' of Wikipedia because u have got the 'powers' and 'resources' to endlessly edit, leaving nothing for any other editor and therby defeating the very purpose of 'free to all edit' policy of Wikipedia. I am not going to make essays on this issue anymore. It is upto whether U respect others POV or bundle them into 'Vandals' and consolidate your position and control over certain parts of the WP.

....Anon accused of Vandalism on Diamirza article.

Well, every time you edit the article, you remove all of the category and interwiki links at the bottom of the page, so iy looks like simple vandalism. Please discuss your changes with the other users on the talk page. I will unprotect the article when all parties can come to some sort of an agreement. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Well i would say u have been removing the chunk of information i have been adding for long. i donot know how to talk to others. U better come in and arrange whatever u want to sort out with me and other Vandals....Anon

---

DiaMirza

Please explain Your actions..more clearly Graemel...the protector of the Diamirza article. I don't understand your move. If don't like editing by others why can't u keep it locked forever instead of allowing innocent Victims like me to edit it in good faith thinking the information i added would be retained and not Vandalised by others by the application of your fairness and judgement. You lock it..a person like me would no longer bother it..true. But whats the point in inviting others to edit and contribute when a person invested with 'powers to lock and unlock' articles at his discretion can decide the direction of the article. 'Free editing' doesn't amount to Vandalism..i agree but that 'locking' the article or banning the user for some time or forever wouldn't solve the problem. Involve yourself..look into the matter, hISTORY, what has been added and what is been removed,why it is being subjected frequent edits by others, explain your action supported by 'reason',giving warning to the editors in dispute before locking.

These are minimum requirements of 'fair play' i expect from a Wikipedian. or otherwise i don't see anything other than 'anarchy' and 'excesses' by the few privileged admns or moderators or frequent editors who have got the power and time to endlessley vandal an article. I hope u take it in the proper perspective and not get agitated, or frustated and ban me because u don't like others preaching you. I will be watching for your moves. Anon..accused of Vandalism of DiaMirza article.

Please post your arguments for the changes on the article talk page and discuss them with the other users. I don't have any views on this article and was only responding to a request posted to one of the admin pages asking for help with vandalism. The article will not remain protected for more than a few days, but there is potential for it to be protected for a much shorter time if you attent to resolve things with the other editors of the article. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Request To Administrator If you responded to some request posted by others and not aware of facts then please respond to my request now to unlock and restore the article as it is edited by me. If there is no 'Mechanism' for solving this issue why don't you mediate here instead simply responding to others complaint unaware of facts. There is no point making arguments and 'counter arguments' in the discussion page unless there is a propsect of settlement. i invite you to mediate the issue. Ask the others Zora,Plum..something to post their arguments why they have been 'Vandals' of my posts. Have they got any 'special privileges' to only retain their POV and presentation or do they want even others to supply and edit information. I don't want unsolicited invitation of 'Zora' to contribute to 'Indian Cinema Project'.(If only they allow me to contribute to dia mirza article).

I request you the administrator and protector of Diamirza article to be 'proactive' and act to mediate the dispute between the two alleged 'Vandals', to resolve the issue, to unlock the article. ..Anon..alleged Vandal of Dia Mirza article.

SavvyMiss

Oops! Sorry - didn't understand, and didn't know how to read messages! I get it now! Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Missshmu (talk • contribs) .

Ah, ok. I'll go remove some of the warnings from your talk page then. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to go back and delete those multiple links - will that pull my page off the delete page?

I think I have already removed all of the external links you added. It won't get your page removed from AFD, but you're welcome to argue for the article to be kept on the deletion discussion. Just because you created the article doesn't stop you from trying to have it kept. If you can supply some indenendent press references talking about your site, that would probably help your case. Add any references to the article and note that fact on the AFD page. If you can supply them, I will consider withdrawing the deletion request. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you probably want to read WP:WEB as I cited it when putting the article up for deletion. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Free jpeizer - Greentealovers information

GraemeL,

I provided most of the information on the green tea page related to Japanese Green tea, I also wrote extensively on health benefits, and the tea ceremony providing information directly from my site to Wikipedia. Therefore a REFERENCE to my site where I added information to Wikipedia as a value-add to it is totally valid.

I would also indicate to you that your health benefits citation on that page is to WHOLE FOODS -- a conglomerate food retailer which discusses more than green tea in its article. Greentealovers is dedicated to ONLY healthy teas and provides a wealth of information on its site.

The Tea ceremony page also has a reference to the TEA MUSE which sells items on the page referenced. It seem to me there is a double standard going on here here. I provided lots of information originally to insure the Wiki information on Green tea was correct and full -- and a reference to the information provided should be valid.

Adding links to your own site is against Wikipedia guidelines. The site is primarily an online shop and not a reliable source as a reference. Please stop adding links to it, or you will end up being blocked. I'm not particularly interested in what else is being used as a reference, I caught you spamming your own site, not whoever added the other links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 18:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Greentealovers

Graeme,

Instead of simply removing my references without reading I suggest you check the pages I have been referencing and compare them to the information on Japanese green tea on the green tea page. They are word for word from my site and have been so for some time. So if you don't allow the reference we are going to also have to delete that information from the Green Tea page as well because I am not going to allow any of it to be used unless my site gets the appropriate reference for its use.

I don't know who you are in the Wikipedia Hierarchy but we are going to need to appeal on to a higher authority on other issues as well. Your reference in the Health Section is TO A RETAIL VENDOR - WHOLE FOODS -- their information on the health effects of green tea is no more valid than mine by your definition - except that I provide dthat Information to wikipedia first.

JP

If the text is word for word from your site, then please remove it. It is a copyright violoation, unless you realease it under the GFDL. The other references are not particularly any of my concern. I'm patrolling recent changes, I caught you spamming references to your own site and warned you about it. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Graeme,

Its unfortunate we've gone to defcon 4 over providing an appropriate reference for information the Wikipedia green tea page has been carrying from my site for months -- and unless we step back from this cliff the wikipedia community will be the poorer for it. I don;t understand the information validity of my site is only now being called into question when the green tea reference page of wikipedia has been carrying that information for months and none of you "Green tea experts" has questioned it. The reason is because the information I provided is in fact quite valid and correct.

Before you do any blocking we'll need to talk to your superiors and ask them why they allow information to be added to wikipedia with the appropriate references and then drop the references but not the data, because that is what was done and that *DOES* constitute a copyright violation. Wikipedia had the permission from Greentealovers to use the green tea information it provided as long as the site was appropriately referenced as having provided it - That understanding existed for months when I worked with IATESQUIRREL to develop both the Green Tea and other related sections providing text, images, etc... Now it seems the reference has been arbitraily removed and not allowed.

So i will ask you once more if you will allow the appropriate reference of my site on the green tea page. If you do not, i will pull all information related to green tea referenced directly from my site as well as the formatting I originally provided - And then i will tell the Wikipedia higher ups exactly why i did it and who was responsible for making it happen.

When this is done, I also expect the Wholefoods reference in Health benefits to be removed as well -- By your definition it violates the Advertising policy.

I await your response before evicerating the Green Tea page of the relevant data its been carrying for months simply because of a policy that does not allow the appropriate referencing of my site for providing it, when on the same page a major retailer is allowed as a link.

RGDS

JP

You seem to think that you need some sort of quid pro quo for contributing to Wikipedia. If we want you to contribute, we need to link to your site in return. This is not the case. You should either contribute to the project freely or not at all. I am not calling the quality of your site into question, just stating that it does not qualify as what policy terms as a reliable reference source. There are over 1 million articles in the project and nobody has the time to police each and every reference or external link. I happened to catch you using Wikipedia to link to your own site and not whoever added the other reference. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Graeme,

What I think is that we need a mediator on this.

1) when you add word for word data to a wikipedia topic to explain it appropriately to users and work with another wikipedian (IATESQUIRREL) to do so, its completely approriate to provide a reference to the site that has provided that information -- And in fact, that is the tradition of authorship that has been followed in this country and others for a century. I also beleive that when both the data and the reference have existed in the public space (wikipedia) for months it means that both the topic and the reference has been implictely accepted. When the reference is inadvertantly dropped and the information kept THAT IS THE PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED -- not punishing the original author for providing both the data and the appropriate citation.

2) it is innapropriate to deride one site for a policy violation while allowing another on the same page to stay. How can you validly explain designating Wholefoods a realiable source on GREEN TEA HEALTH BENEFITS and Greentealovers an invalid source? -- particularly when Wikipedia has been carrying Greentealovers information explaining green tea on its pages for months?

I find your assertions that you somehow "caught" me doing anything innappropiate highly problemmatic. Before reverse engineering the green tea page are you up for mediation?

RGDS JP

No need to go as far as mediation. Post something to the talk page of the article and I'll abide by what other contributors think. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Graeme,

I am willing to abide by what people think as well, but the question I have for you is this: It will take time for people to weigh in. the fact is my data and my reference were up for months. Now the data is still up but the reference is gone. I'd like to maintain both the reference and the data on the site until a resolution is reached. The alternative is to pull both, but I am not crazy about doing that or the extra work in readding the data later its involves literally almost the entire section on Japanese green tea. If you allow one reference on the green tea page related to the specific page the data came from until resolution of the issue, we can proceed with the solution you mention and I will post the conversation on the discussion page.

RGDS

JP

OK, go ahead and do that. I'll remove my warnings from your talk page as well. --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Graeme,

Thanks - its much appreciated. I added the conversation to the discussion page. Please edit as you feel appropriate. Your viewpoint should be avalable and considered.

RGDS

JP

Blocking of 217.169.129.33

Dear GraemeL, It was right of you to block IP: 217.169.129.33, but you ought to only have use that as a final resort.

Have they attacked within the past hour? is a question you should ask yourself. This IP address is, as you should have noticed, from a school and as I have explained about a million times, this is the IP address of 3 campuses simultanioesly, as they are all linked to the same server. So, from the outside world, you see 217.169.129.33, when this could be narrowed down to individual campuses, but sadly this cannot happen.

I, as a student of this school, I am trying everything I can to hunt down who was online at these moments (of vandalism), and bring them to justice. I will be talking with my campus's Network Asministrator and I hope to be able to see if anyone had vandalised Wikipedia at those particular moments in time.

I ask you to unblock 217.169.129.33 and allow our school foundation to be able to edit the world's best encyclopedia,

Jean-Paul 19:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked. Sorry for the inconvenience. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Stash Tea

Are my changes what you were looking for.

Stash Tea is stocked in all three of America's main three supermarkets (Albertsons, Kroger, Safeway) under the supermarket chains' various names (Ralphs, Vons, etc.)

I just enjoy tea, they're private, I know nobody there, I don't work for them. But they are one of the world's major tea companies.

I thought they might be, that's why I left you a note rather than just removing the article. Them being private means you can't use a stock listing to establish notability, but you should be able to find press links to press releases. WP:CORP says "This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations". Shouldn't be too hard for you to find. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Lock Diamriza article

This is Anon who requested to unlock the article. If u r not interested in unlocking it please lock it to all registered users as well..thereby not giving unfair advantage to the Plumcouch and others who have been editing freely...Anon alleged Vandal of Diamirza.com

Squid proxy

Thanks for checking. Mak (talk) 23:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Muscular dystrophy

Hi GraemeL, I had added an external link to the article which pointed to a community building initiative in India for Muscular dystrophy. But you deleted that. I am sure you have a reason behind it as keeping Vandalism off a "wiki" is huge responsibility. Would you be kind enough to clarify as this link was not a link to anything commercial. It is an initiative by parents of a kid in India who is suffering and since there is no community in India. I guess it is humanitarian to keep the link here for increased visibility. But again our thoughts may differ and I would like to understand how "wikipedia" works.

Regards Deep

The link was certainly not commercial. Unfortunatly there are hundreds of sites beloning to small support groups and allowing a few of them just leads to more being added and articles such as this one end up with dozens of links. I'm posting a welcome message to your talk page that contains links to some Wikipedia pages containing guidelines and policies. This should help you get acquainted with Wikipedia. --GraemeL ^(talk) 12:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

i have a question!

How can we delete users in wiki. i work in a company and we have internal wiki. I have admin rights.

People create multiple users and use just one! Is there a way to get rid of users that are not being used at all?

Kindly let me know.

Thanks!

Sorry, I'm not involved in the maintenance of the Mediawikisoftware and don't know the answer to that. I'm not even sure where the best place to ask would be. You might try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Dia Mirza (again)

Hello, GraemeL, someone added the endorsements again after a reeeeeally long debate - and another user (or the same, not sure?) questions IMDb as a source and posed some really ridiculous questions. To be frank: I don't know what to do anymore. I really tried to talk to them, but apparantly they choose not to listen or forget things very fast. I have no idea what to say anymore. Every piece of advice is more than appreciated. Best regards, --Plumcouch 15:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

There are only two things I can think of to help at the moment. Ask for more help on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cinema page to try and involve more regular contributors who understand the style and content guidelines. Secondly, you could open an RfC, also with the intention of involving more regulars. I can see why you're getting frustrated, you're making all the efforts to bring the article up to a reasonable level of quality and trying your best to drag the anon into the discussions.

The only other thing I can think of to do would be to leave the article for a while and let them lose interest. Then come back at some point in the future and edit things back to the usual content and style for biography articles.

At least the anon on the 82. addresses seems to be reasonable. I'm going away for the weekend tomorrow, so I won't be around for a few days. I'll keep an eye on things until I leave and make a decision on whether or not semi-protection is justified again before I go.

Don't lose heart and thanks for trying your best with this article. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello, GraemeL,

I asked some of my fellow editors to help me - if this isn't going to work, I'll ask RfC for help and if even *that* isn't going to work, I'll heed your advice and leave the article alone. Thanks for helping me and for the encouraging words. Have a nice weekend, best wishes, --Plumcouch 17:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Unknown

Sorry, but it is not a commercial links, no money is been made from it, please check your past discuss on the same topic, the page was built for wikipedia some time back , please do me a favour and go thru past discussion on the same topic.. Notice the other links on the same section all are commercial link... with even good and other links ad to it. And the links go back more than 4 years on the same page, please check your record.. Day1110. I research owns a commerical link, with was place on it and was remove, i guess may be rival or other personal issue.. So he decided to use wiki as a channel to fight back.. i guess .. Thank you very much sir.. have a best day.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.195.84.5 (talk • contribs) .

Can you point me to an article? This is your only edit from that IP address. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

External links

Hello, I am very sorry about that. My point was to inform readers about articles and reviews that might be interesting for them. Our site offer also information that is free for all and I tried to add links only to External links of relevant topics (somewhere there was even a note above External links that informed about that this section may include commercial links). So, probably I misinterpreted the purpose of these sections, I am sorry.

No problem. Thanks for understanding. If you read the links in the message I posted to your talk page, you'll get some idea of the problems we have keeping external links under control. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Removal of my link that I posted?

Hello,

Today i posted my wardriving dedicated site on wikipedia in the wardriving page. Later on, I saw that my link had been deleted. I find that a great shame, as my site is not even making any money, and It took my probably over 200hours to make. I built it for people who are interested in wardriving to be able to read articals and tutorials that I have written on the subject. In my opinion it is the best wardriving site on the internet so why cant it have a link?

So can I please put my site back on the list?

email removed

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.80.140.147 (talk • contribs) .

Sorry, but linking to your own sites and inserting the same link into many articles is nothing more than spamming to promote your site. You even claimed in the link text that the site is new. Wikipedia is not a medium that you can use for promoting your sites. Please contribute content, not external links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Shouldn't you be studying?

Thanks, much appreciated =] — FireFox (U T C) 18:56, 19 May '06

Casino Night

Why do you leave the other "commercial link" up then? And also, Monte Carlo Nights is a Flag Ship casino party company. I think it is neccesary that people get a chance to see what it looks like.

I beileve you are being very unfair on this one.

Sorry, I simply didn't realize that the other one was a commercial link. I've removed it now. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Algarve

The Algarve page has several links promoting commercial websites and services, such as:

• A complete Guide
• Remexido.web.pt
• Algarve tourist information
• Algarve Portal
• Vale Do Lobo
• [1] - The Portugal News online
• Lagos-Luz-Sagres.com
• portimao.com

My websites are relevant to the Algarve. They are not official websites, but are related to tourism (like these ones above). What this links have that mine don't? Why can we get to an agreement so I can place at least one link per page? I'm not vandalizing the page and really don't wan't to continue fighting. It's simply not fare to see my links removed while other links promoting commercial websites and services stay.

If you agree with my point, please place the following links:

• Algarve page: www.algarve-carhire.net Algarve Car Hire
• Portugal page: www.portugal-car-hire.net Car Hire Portugal

Regards, Marcio

I did request that somebody look at the links by putting a tag above them. sonce nobody has done it. I have cleaned them up myself. --GraemeL ^(talk) 19:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi! I wanted to thank you for your help on the BI article. I have spent a lot of time on it, and made some recent compromises, to appease Rob. However, he still wants to delete all reference to anything that opposes his view on this. On another site, he tried to link to his personal website, until other editors warned him to stop. It's a good thing that Wikopedia is open source, and not confined to one author's opinion. Again, thank you. It has been a daily job to correct vandalism.

I did not know that Scots eat porridge with salt. My ancestry is Scottish (my grandfather was named Charles Stewart), but my family has long been 'Americanized'. I eat oatmeal with milk and sugar. Or rather, splenda.jgwlaw 21:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen the work going on to reformat the article on a sub page. Anons chopping out sections of correctly cited text without comment is pretty much always going to be viewed as vandalism. --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Be adventurious and give it a try with salt one day. It's totally different. You may not like it, but at least you'll have tried it. ;-) --GraemeL ^(talk) 21:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll try (almost) anything once.  ;-) jgwlaw 22:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

New to wiki

Is my website LEDmonthly really a spam site?

I had a link in the past, and recently you are not allowing it.

RE: GCSEs

Yeah, like that's going to happen. Thanks anyway :P. --Celestianpower ^háblame 12:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please do not remove RFCs. It is considered vandalism. 72.152.176.7 14:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

hey

Hey, Fuck you1