Please add new messages to the bottom of the page. If a conversation is started here, I'll respond here; if it starts on your talk page, I'll respond there.
Emailing me
I prefer to communicate via talk pages, but if there is an issue that you'd rather not discuss via talk, you may email me. If you email me about a block, it's not helpful to write, "help! I've been blocked!" Please include your username (if you have one) and/or the IP address that's been affected.
Why did you remove my external links?
If you've come here because you want to know why I removed some external links you've added, please read Wikipedia's policies on spam and Wikipedia external link guidelines first. Because of Wikipedia's popularity, it has become a target for folks looking to promote their sites, which is against Wikipedia policies. If you read WP:SPAM and still feel that your link(s) does not violate those policies, let me know.
One common argument I hear is But so-and-so link is on that article, and it's commercial! WP:EL doesn't explicitly forbid links to commercial sites; it depends on the notability of the link, its content, and if it's a reference or a notable pro/con argument on a controversial subject, etc. On the other hand, I think that many Wikipedians would agree that there are way too many commercial links at present time, so feel free to "prune away" if the link doesn't meet guidelines in WP:EL. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vandalism and insults left here will be recycled in the bit bucket. Remember: be nice!
Talk archives
Admin
Vandalism
Deletion
Talk
Maybe you can help me out here. I'm under the impression that The Orlando Area Guide is a spam link similar to the one you removed from the External links section of Orlando, Florida. A "team" of anonymous editors disagrees with me, saying this is an official website. Can you review the site in question, and tell me if this is a site with value to Wikipedia's audience? -- SwissCelt 18:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie, I will see about adding my Java Lectures you deleted to WikiBooks.If I do, will you again delete the link to it from this article? 20 or so lectures were written in powerpoint because I can simulate
the execution of code with the animations. That is why I hosted it externally. I will be happy to put those lectures in the public domain. Since you suggested it, can you tell me if Wikibooks can support *.pps content? Ultimately, they are just files that open on a link. Pardon me if I offended you in the email I sent. I was thoroughly offended by your instant deletion of my content. As I have said, my intent was to give away the content. I first attempted to see if I could just donate it to Wikipedia. Since, however, I only saw Wikipedia has the capability to host HTML content, I moved to the public googlepages and hosted it there. Please notice that I am not charging for it and--as of now--the site has no other purpose than to freely offer the content. Please advise what circumstances will cause you to delete the link again. If I put it in Wikibooks, will you delete that link too? Thank you kindly for your assistance in this matter. Regards,Tom Curmudgeon99 (talk · contribs)
- If you add the content to Wikibooks, I don't see why it's necessary to also have the link here. Wikibook material is just as accessible as Wikipedia. I'm pretty sure that you'd need to export all of your Powerpoint content to plain text in order to add it to Wikibooks. As I said earlier, you're welcome to propose addition of the link on the Java programming talk page; I just started a review discussion of current links in the article. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie, First, thank you for your reply. Second, the whole point of those Java Lectures is the dynamic content. If you had perhaps clicked on one of the links--especially the later ones--you would see that the whole point is the dynamic content that illustrates the execution path for the code being explained. If we are limited to just static text than I don't want to essentially rebuild from scratch content that took at least six years to develop.
Also--and I may regret alerting you to this--there IS an external link on the Wikibooks entry for 'Java programming'--and it is an external link to a site that has basically the kind of plain static text that you want me to convert my content to. Funny, nobody on the Wikibook site has molested that person's content. However, I have added my link to my external content right below that guy's content. So, if that irks you, you can go delete my content link as well as the other person's link. Instead, I bet the person who administrates that site is not as spam-shocked as you apparently are. I understand you're trying to keep the garbage out but you ought to give content providers more of a benefit of the doubt. I offered my content for an altruistic purpose. Unless you take it upon yourself to mount a crusade against my googlepages content, it will stand and will no doubt help somebody learn to program in Java. Please just leave it be. Thank you, Tom —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Curmudgeon99 (talk • contribs) .
Jamie, would you mind emailing me for a discussion on external link guideline interpretation?
Thanks. --Irwinstreet 17:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Is there a reason you want to communicate via email? I prefer to use talk pages. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll take a stab at it. I work for an online publisher of free information for professionals. We have users who ask us if we can put links to our info in Wikipedia, the way our competition does. They say our stuff is more useful and lacks ads. They also are almost never knowledgeable enough to do this themselves, so they ask us, believing it to be possible given our competitor's links, and our job besides. Is there any way for us to try this, short of training a cadre of users to edit Wikipedia pages? Thanks.70.231.142.138 04:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:SPAM and WP:EL generally advise against adding links to your own site, ad-free or not. The focus at Wikipedia is clearly on article content, not on external links, so the most of the time editors err on the side of deleting anything that's questionable. It can be a case-by-case judgement for each article; you could try by posting a request to an article's talk page suggesting a link and seeing what others think. Keep in mind that just because an article currently has competitor/commercial links doesn't mean that they are appropriate (in fact, I often end up deleting multiple commercial links while I'm cleaning up after a multi-page spammer). Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jamie, I am new to Wikipedia and am not familiar with all of the guidelines. I added a link to the following website (www.sembasics.com), which was subsequently removed. I have looked over the guidelines and realize that I personally cannot suggest this site as I am the owner of the site in question. I am wondering, though, if someone else could recommend it as I think that it would be a helpful resource for the search engine marketing, search engine optimization and/or other relevant articles on Wikipedia.
Here, are the relevant sections of the External LInks guidelines page which indicate why I think it would be worthwhile including:
What should be linked to
4. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article. Ideally this content should be integrated into the Wikipedia article, then the link would remain as a reference, but in some cases this is not possible for copyright reasons or because the site has a level of detail which is inappropriate for the Wikipedia article.
5. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as professional athlete statistics, screen credits, interviews, or online textbooks.
This site is a work in progress and eventually will include a list of tutorials on various subjects relating to search engine marketing (similar to an online textbook), such as search engine optimization, pay-per-click advertising, blogs, and more. It is true that there are ads on the site and that we may offer other services in the future, but the tutorials in and of themselves are a free resource for the search community and complement the information foudn on Wikipedia. Also, I have noticed that other sites which have links on Wikipedia contain ads. I have taken that to mean that a commercial site is not a site which has ads on them.
I would appreciate it if you could let me know the guidelines of what is considered a commercial site. Also, could you please let me know whether or not free, online tutorials comes under the category of "neutral and accurate material not already in the article" which contain "a level of detail that is not suitable for inclusion in an article". After all, they contain "other, meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article".
I assure you that these tutorials are extremely well researched and are constantly being revised to keep them accurate and up-to-date. Thank you for your time, Yours truly, Moshe Morris SEMBasics.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GDMSEO (talk • contribs) .
- Your site has Google ads. I don't see any content in it that couldn't be included (or isn't already include) in the article. Most editors, including myself, will remove links to similar sites, as Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promoting commercial or personal sites. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Three questions:
1) Are step-by-step insturctions of how to properly implement a search engine marketing campaign they type of info that would be part of a Wikipedia article?
2) If the answer to that question is no, then is this the type of information that would compliment a Wikipedia article? If not, may I ask why not?
3) I noticed that the other links in External Link section for Search Engine Marketing also contained ads. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GDMSEO (talk • contribs) .
- Answers
- (1) I don't understand the question, though I will note that Wikipedia is not an instruction guide. Also, it's not appropriate to add content just for the sake of linking a commercial/personal site as a source of that content.
- (2) Answered in #1.
- (3) Then they should probably be removed unless there was a consensus on the talk page of that article for their inclusion. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie, I added an external link to the only website dealing with information about climbing in western colorado. This is an informational resource. Why would you delete it? Bigh 18:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Because it's not highly relevant to Colorado. If we have a Colorado climbing resource link at Colorado, then why shouldn't we have links for Square dancing and Archery in Colorado? Wikipedia is not a link directory. Try Dmoz for that. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jamie and visitor's wikipedia, i'm so sorry about my url, i don't know.
can i share a picture again? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sanke (talk • contribs) 15:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Now that I've taken a closer look at the links, I'm not sure if the ones you added were that bad. Clearly there is a problem on that page with commercial links, but a couple are probably appropriate. I've started a discussion on the talk page; I apologize if I acted in haste. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. Appreciate it. Clq 15:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem! OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I added a link to the loose change video, which you removed. It was placed right below the link to the "The Path To 9/11" video. I would like you to tell me why you removed this. If a link can be placed for such a right-wing piece of propaganda, surely a left-oriented link can be placed in the same section. Please leave msg on my talk page Cavell 21:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- "Loose Change" has been discussed endlessly on the talk page (probably in the archives now). The other movies you mention in the edit summary are major theatrical or television releases, while Loose Change is amateur. There is a link for it on the conspiracy page. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jamie,
I am the user that Devios was not thrilled about.
I am a chemist who has insight into GSE. I have copies of the studies done on GSE. I actually read the studies unlike Devios.
The info Devios put in the article is false and speculation. And worse it is copyrighted info
that the copyright holder did not grant Devios permission to use. Just thought I set the record straight and clear up the air.
Review the factual article and you will see that their are verifiable references that prove the facts. Devios is incredulous!
Good Day, Nicole.
Hey, i have to ask you that if i revert again, will it be under 3RR. I only reverted clear vandalism. There was no content dispute. Thanks.nids(♂) 20:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Nope, 3RR does not apply to obvious vandalism. Revert away. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your encouragements and clearing my long standing doubts.nids(♂) 20:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Quit editing palmer trinity school, you no nothing of it and its interactions, look how flawed the website curently is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.144.108.236 (talk • contribs)
- Actually, I've spoken with an administrator there (a Mr. Hoke) regarding some of the vandalism to the page. He confirmed that most of the additions anon IPs have attempted to add were bogus; I will continue to remove similar crap from the entry. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
fool, why don't you quit being a idiot by reverting the page to an incorrect stance instead of fixing the true problems of the page, I inserted the real facts and figures so that the page contains true information. Nice bluff though about Mr. Hoke (you ass) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.225.220.122 (talk • contribs)
- Why don't you ask Mr. Hoke if he spoke with an editor from Wikipedia? (ok?) OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just thought I'd let you know about that Jonathan Nguyen page you just prodded – it's been deleted and recreated several times. Regards, — riana_dzasta wreak havoc|damage report 05:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the heads up. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- My pleasure! — riana_dzasta wreak havoc|damage report 13:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First, your not supposed to delete comments on user talk, specifically when you refuse to listen to reason, leave PTS to people of PTS since you know nothing about the school beyond whst s web page tells you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OneKorea (talk • contribs) .
- Removing personal attacks from talk pages is perfectly acceptable. You do not own the article (nor does anyone else for that matter). OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You forgot to sign your last nomination. Yomanganitalk 19:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Doh! Fixed it, thanks! OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Joe, I added a new external link today to a website I am developing about spam, I note that you removed it. Apologies if it didn't meet the criteria, but I have gone over the external links guidelines a couple of times and I cannot see what was wrong. The site offers advise articles researched by myself and broken into what I consider interesting and worthwhile topics. It includes a relevant news feed and the facility to translate the website into a number of languages. I have developed a number of similar sites and linked to Wikipedia, as well as contributing to various projects here. Basically, my question is what did you see straight-off that was wrong with it, I have been searching for answers on this topic here for a while and need more guidance. Another site I developed has gone through over 60 revisions on Wikipedia and has just been dropped today also. It's quite frustrating, I am not looking to corrupt this website in any way, as it is a tremendous resource for all internet users such as myself. Would be grateful for any response thast could help me :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.63.145.233 (talk • contribs)
- Read the guidelines again; in fact, the first thing that the "spam1" template says is to not add links to your own sites. It's generally not a good idea to develop sites solely for the purpose of linking Wikipedia to them. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia, contribute content to the articles. Your site has Google ads; Wikipedia is not a vehicle to drive traffic to a revenue-generating site. By the way, I'm not Joe either. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ohnoitsjamie&diff=76697279&oldid=76697256 -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Much obliged, and thanks for the user page revert. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- My finger was on the block button waiting for that one. ;) I noticed months ago you'd surpassed my edit count (you must be over 20k by now). Do you have the highest number of non-admin/non-bot edits? OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
why did you revert my edits on malcolm x? thats extremely uncool!
--- all my additions are from an excelent bbc documentary
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2485457538368783680&q=malcolm+x+bbc
such data as oxford union debate, meeting castro and some other details that, after watching documentary, i found missing in the article, i have added. it is extremely rude to delete hours of other people's work, and indeed i do not understand what have you against my edits that added a lot of interesting information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.132.170 (talk • contribs)
- Here's a direct quote from your lengthy addition: Malcolm X had great energy, he was able to work day after day with just four hours of sleep or less, he read a lot and once he believed in a cause devoted himself to it completely. I reverted it mostly because it was unsourced. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reverting vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 05:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
|
|
| Here in Wikipedia there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go unappreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go unnoticed. As Esperanzians we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. This is where the Barnstar Brigade comes in. The object of this program is to seek out the people which deserve a Barnstar, and help them feel appreciated. With your help, we can recognize more dedicated editors!
|
What's New?
|
| September elections are upon us! Anyone wishing to be a part of the Advisory Council may list themselves as a candidate from 18 September until 24 September, with the voting taking place from 25 September to 30 September. Those who wish to help with the election staff should also list themselves!
|
| Appreciation Week, a program currently in development, now has its own subpage! Share your good ideas on how to make it awesome there!
|
| The Esperanza front page has been redesigned! Many thanks to all who worked hard on it.
|
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter. |
|
|
|
- The proposals page has been updated, with some proposals being archived.
- Since the program in development Appretiaion week is getting lots of good ideas, it now has its own subpage.
- The September 2006 Council elections will open for nominations on 18 September 2006. The voting will run from 25 September 2006 until 30 September 2006. If you wish to be a candidate or a member of the elections staff, please list yourself!
- The new Esperanza front page design has but put up - many thanks to all who worked on it!
- TangoTango has written a script for a bot that will list new members of Esperanza, which will help those who welcome new Esperanzains greatly!
|
Signed...
|
|
|
|
| Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
|
|
Can you stop going around and giving others warnings? you have no authority. Leave me alone and never leave comments on my page, you, you dog lover. --Rizzwan 22:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This is the vandalism in question. Furthermore, your assertion about my authority is incorrect, as you will discover if you continue to vandalize pages. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You need to get laid. --Rizzwan 22:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- And you need to stop making personal attacks. The next one will get you blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, I own the copty rights, and seccondly there is a copy right clearance on the text see:
http://www.geocities.com/~abdulwahid/hinduism/hindu_women.html
Look at the bottom of the page! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rizzwan (talk • contribs) .
- Even without the copyright issue, it's not a good idea to make such sweeping changes to such an article without proposing them first on the talk page. Furthermore, much of the text you added was not well-organized and not formatted properly and is not written from a neutral point of view. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well duhh I am also working on it, and formatting it, I will change the tone and all my sources are cited. So if you, revert it then you will be vandalizing the page. Are you a misogynist or a supporter of women abuse? if no then let me do what I am doing, as I am a former Hindu converted to Islam so I know what I am talking about. --Rizzwan 22:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Will you leave me the hell alone are you some sort of a commie? or something. --Rizzwan 22:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You'd already created a staging area for the article. Please fix the formatting and references there before attempting to add it to the article space. Also, I'm warning you once again to not make personal attacks on other users. You won't be warned again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're reverting my work back with no-good reasons, I am new to wiki so obviously, I am not going to know how to format the sources properly, hence why I have added them all unformatted that someone can do them (i.e) format the. SO why revert my work back to some apologetic misogynistic supporting article?
How do you expect any articles to work on here if you go an revert everything back just because someone hasn't formated it correctly. The point of wiki is to do collaborations to expand the articles. So please I am asking you nicely don't revert my work or help me to format it and to remove the text whcih is not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Why are you trying so hard to piss me off? --Rizzwan 23:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
