User talk:75.139.111.29

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

August 2010[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Wikipedia:Sandbox 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 to this encyclopedia. Thank you. The Wikipedia sandbox is for users to experiment, but you are abusing it by placing youtube video links over and over with no other content. This is abuse of the sandbox due it being spam links and you should stop this at once. Joel M. (talk) 17:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

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.
I am not sure if this is a shared IP adress.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
The links were not repeated, If you look carfully you see the urls are different. I am experimenting to see what links exist and work.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I inspected the videos and found that even if the URL is slightly different every time, it is the exact video. Also, these videos don't have a clear encyclopedic value.
The video could have encyclopedic value by the extremely unique viewing history of the video.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Could someone make an article about it?--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
By adding the list of Youtbue videos URL to the sandbox, you will be seen as engaging in spamming. If your intentions are ligament, I apoligize for the misunderstanding, but, you should not continue to list these videos anywhere on Wikipedia. You can check the videos using another method.
Could I add it to the other Sandboxes mentioned?--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
You spelled 'legitament' wrong--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
What other method could I use where it is linked?--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok, thankyou.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
After reviewing the history, I see you have added the list of Youtube URLs over eight times after it has been removed. You have been warned about the issue, refraining from doing so may lead the involvement of an administrator.-- ℐℴℯℓ ℳ. ℂℌAT ✐ 18:48, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
If people do not want them they could just delete it.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
It is not as bad as putting it in an article.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I thought the sandbox was a good place for stuff like that. It is regulary cleaned anyway. I thought it was a good idea, but if you do not like it you could discuss another way with me.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Please, when you reply to a comment, don't reply within the comment of the other person. Doing so makes it hard to read.
I did not comment in the middle of other comments, I indented.
I omitted to mention a method for you to test your links due to the fact I believed you knew how, I apologize. You can copy & paste the links into the web browser one at a time. Of course this is very tedious. A better method would be to email your your self the links. By doing so, you can click each link quickly. I hope the suggestions help you.
Yes that helped, but where can I do that on Wikipedia?
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.
Thank you, -- ℐℴℯℓ ℳ. ℂℌAT ✐ 19:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
You are welcome!--75.139.111.29 (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Wikipedia:Sandbox, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing their websites from appearing on Wikipedia. This will be your last warning. Please discontinue to spam the sandbox. ℐℴℯℓ ℳ. ℂℌAT ✐ 19:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

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.
ℂℌAT, I'm confused. You mean a brand new Wiki editor using the Sandbox can't play with YouTube links. Can't practice reverting things? Can't practice making lists? An administrator is supposed to get involved to tell him not to throw sand in the sandbox?
I agree with you!--75.139.111.29 (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
The guy on his second edit came to my user page and said "hello." Instead of coldly reverting his test edit, I politely responded hi, how are how, or whatever. I'll clean it up later. He is a newbie. He is using the sandbox. May I suggest cutting him some slack. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 05:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Allow me to clarify the situation.
I think yuo have clarified enough. :)--75.139.111.29 (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Starting at 12:48, August 9, 2010 the user begins to post a long string of youtube videos, all in which consist of the same video but slightly different URL. [1] Here's an example of the video [2].
Every time the sandbox cleared out, the user would post the same string of Youtube videos onto the sandbox. The user continued to copy and paste the same sting of online videos (which all where the same video) until 13:28, August 9, 2010. Within almost an hour the user re-posted the same string of videos 12 times.
This is clearly not normal behaviors of a new editor learning how to edit in the Sandbox rather, that of a person link spamming.
The person was given proper warning and engaged in conversation as to why this behavior should stop.
"By adding the list of Youtbue videos URL to the sandbox, you will be seen as engaging in spamming. If your intentions are ligament, I apologize for the misunderstanding, but, you should not continue to list these videos anywhere on Wikipedia. You can check the videos using another method."
The user is more than welcomed to make list, test reverts, and, "throw sand in the sandbox," but link spamming is not tolerated.
"Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed." Link Spamming
"Adding links to online free videos that promote a site or product is not allowed [see exception below]. Often these videos have been uploaded in violation of their copyright which adds an additional reason for not linking to them."
The point here isn't to wag a big baton and play police. The video spamming just needs to stop. A ligetament user would have stopped right away instead of posting the spam more than 5 time after the warning was given. -- ℐℴℯℓ ℳ. ℂℌAT ✐ 06:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
While I agree with you generally, the language "an article or user page" does not include the sandbox. Besides, the sandbox gets wiped frequently. Think of the harm that WP:LINKSPAM seeks to avoid. Certainly a sandbox that gets wiped frequently does not fall within the harm the rule seeks to avoid. Think of the remedy, "repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed." Well, in the sandbox, that happens automatically. I simply see no great harm with the sandbox being used for anything that does not incite violence or is otherwise criminal in nature. I do, however, see a greater harm in a new user getting the reception he has been getting so far. May I suggest keeping an eye on him and, if he starts spamming outside the sandbox, taking friendly action at that time, ramping up from there? May I also suggest asking on the Talk page of the linkspam rule whether the rule applies to the sandbox? Give the diffs, of course. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 12:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
It's true the language notes, "an article or user page," but I don't feel it is limited to only articles and user pages. Perhaps I am wrong, and I will look into it. The question I asked my self was, "where in Wikipedia is spamming allowed?" Based on that question, I reasoned that Wikipedia should not be victim to spam anywhere, including sandboxes. Of course, I don't think that's the issue. I think the real issue is that I warned the user about link spamming.
The reason I warned the user was not due to the disruptive nature of their spamming. I know the sandbox is wiped out frequently and the spam will be removed. So no, I am not worried about the sandbox being over run with spam. My warnings were intended to guide the, so called, "new user" away from their disruptive behavior. If you read my conversation with the user, you will find that I explained why they shouldn't put the list of videos onto the sandbox. The user then explained they wanted to test the links. I then replied with an easy and quick alternative for them to test the links without being involved in questionable conduct: email the links to your selves and click on each URL. The user replied that they rather test the links on Wikipedia.
Truthfully, I don't believe this user is new. New users don't go to Youtube, produce dozens of URLs that point to the same Youtube account, and then insist on posting it in the sandbox. For all we know, this user may be developing a bot to spam wikipedia and is using Wikipedia's sandbox as a testing ground knowing that it will go unnoticed, and if noticed, go unchallenged.
Like I said before, I'm not trying to be overly zealous with this whole situation. I warned a new user that link spamming is frown upon. I gave the stronger warning almost an hour later when the user was clearly spamming the sandbox intentionally.
And I am not saying this user is a danger to Wikipedia and we should all rush this person with pick forks. It's probably a kid that is experimenting with programming and made themselves a little bot that inserts text into Wikipedia. No big deal, and I applaud them if that's the case. All I am saying is, lay off with all the vids.
I'll look more into the matter of warning users that insert spam in the sandbox. Also, a second or third opinion may be a good thing. I'll post here anything I find. -- ℐℴℯℓ ℳ. ℂℌAT ✐ 17:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Cool, especially regarding the bot. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 03:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
What bot?--75.139.111.29 (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
What ℂℌAT said, that bot. Be that as it may, enjoy your editing here, and, like Anthony said, if I can help any, please let me know. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism[edit]

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at User:Roitr, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I guess i should make sure I stay good.--75.139.111.29 (talk) 15:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

G'day[edit]

Forgive me if someone's already suggested this but you have a lot more freedom to do what you like in your own "user space." Get a user name by creating an account, then create a subpage such as User:Your user name/subpage name and work there, within WP guidelines, to your heart's content. If you want help creating a user subpage, contact me on my talk page. Anthony (talk) 03:07, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

That is a good idea!--75.139.111.29 (talk) 15:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010[edit]

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to WP:SANDBOX, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Cyberthrone :) 17:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Guess what, I have already reported you. Cyberthrone :) 17:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberthrone (talkcontribs)
Why are you such a jerk?
WP:NPA. Cyberthrone 18:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for one week[edit]

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

--PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

While you are gone...[edit]

I suggest you read WP:NPA as well as some civility essays.

and I hope you realise that WP:SANDBOX is NOT your own personal playground. Cyberthrone 18:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)