User talk:Boaznb

June 2008 (http://spam.seekingalpha.com)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. 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. Since 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 rather than re-adding it. Thank you. MER-C 11:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC).

How do I respond to this or contact the editor? Thank you. Boaznb (talk) 12:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Seeking Alpha, etc.

I saw your response here. Rather than continue to clutter that page with our exchanges, I'm responding here. I'll say more later when I have a bit more time but for now I'll just ask that you not be discouraged, that sometimes experienced editors can be misled by their experience, and they may inadvertently run afoul of WP:DONTBITE. BTW - I did drop a note to you about my edits; but I posted it on the Talk page of the IP address, not here, because that's where the edits were made from. See here. JohnInDC (talk) 17:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't intentionally not login, and I have no idea what my IP address is so I'm not sure how to view what you wrote. I admit I probably got carried away but I started having fun with it. I don't know html but after reading the tutorials, I found it very cool how I was able to cite references, set links and figure out how to do other things like redirect (at first I couldn't understand why when I searched for a company under .com it wouldn't come up without a redirect). Before I knew it I was linking right and left. I'm currently an MBA student with too much time on my hands but wikipedia and seeking alpha were my two top research tools that got me through all my courses. Already the appeal of continuing the project I set out to do is starting to wear off but I still hate to see all the work I had already completed go out the window. I would be happy to sit with one of you to go through all the edits and decide which would truly be appropriate and which were a little overzealous.

By the way, do I have to notify you via email that I responded here or do you automatically know? I do not seem to be notified when you respond to me. Thanks again! Boaznb (talk) 18:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed you linked to your other comment. That actually wasn't me, I have no idea what "scrum" even is and would never add three exclamation points to the end of a sentence. But I was in a public area so maybe all the computers shared the same IP address. I would agree with the removal of that edit. Boaznb (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi JohnInDC, so what is the status of my situation? I spoke to some friends who were very supportive of my efforts and offered to help with editing the site. But should I even attempt to do any more edits or should I simply abandon my foray into the Wiki world as a misguided attempt to enter a wider community that doesn't want me? I was really turned off at how quickly MER-C had deleted my hardwork while at the same time, she was so slow to respond to my concerns (or not respond at all as is case). While I appreciate your words of encouragement, I don't feel particularly encouraged. Thank you.Boaznb (talk) 04:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not a bad place, really. It's just a bit easy, I think, for new users to stumble at the threshold with well-intentioned entries that look too much like poorly-intentioned entries that plague the site. Once an editor has been around a bit they become very impatient with the latter and deal with them very brusquely. As for you - well, you can do what you want. Really. I would *advise* trying something other than adding similar links to a couple dozen websites all at once (even if you aren't affiliated with the site and even if they may be helpful). Have you been back to MER-C's talk page? She (he?) has a few small suggestions there. Starting small is a good idea, making little tweaks and editorial improvements, until you begin to get a sense of what will fly here and what won't. There are, for better or for worse, a *ton* of guidelines about what kinds of edits are appropriate - things like, maintaining a neutral point of view; not providing original research, not using Wikipedia as a soapbox and so forth.

There are also a variety of help resources, including editors who have volunteered to help newcomers by answering questions, etc. - you can get started with the 'help' link in the left-hand column there - here however is a direct link to the 'getting started' page.

Look, don't quit. You will do fine. You will make a few mistakes but if you proceed with a bit of caution and care, and act as though you're willing to learn (which you are), then people won't bite your head off. Maybe, find an article that you know something about - not a major article like Exxon, but a smaller one. Your hometown, your high school, something small but interesting that is near where you live. *Those* are the articles that are likely to be incomplete, or inaccurate, or not all that well written, where the community will be grateful for any kind of attention to the thing. Serious and well-intentioned efforts will be appreciated and respected, even if they wind up getting corrected and revised later. I quite literally started out here by making factual fixes to my high school website, and later expanding articles about 1) a hotel I happened to be staying in in Chicago and 2) a cemetery I happened to bike by with a camera on the way home from work in Washington, DC. You could also add an article, but it's often a bit too tempting to add something that, while you're very familiar with it, isn't quite notable. That's why I suggest expanding on one that is already there, but not well formed.

Is this helpful? JohnInDC (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, those are good ideas, much better than MER-C who sent me a link to about a billion articles that needed work done. I must have read through dozens but didn't know anything about any of them. In the end, I'm not sure I have the heart for it anymore. I feel like any work I do will just be undone. I looked at an article I edited probably about three years ago (to a politician's page that had some factualy innacurate info). My edit was gone. I've read some really bad stuff on google about wiki editors whose power went to their heads. I don't know I want to get caught up in all of that. Thanks again though.Boaznb (talk) 18:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

See also User talk:192.114.4.36#Seekingalpha.com spam and likely sockpuppetry. Thanks. -Colfer2 (talk) 14:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Nomination of Mark J. Perry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark J. Perry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark J. Perry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. v/r - TP 23:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)