User talk:BenVic

Additions of http://.crash.net

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory 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 exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.--Hu12 (talk) 10:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue spamming Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.--Hu12 (talk) 10:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Sorry if you think I am spamming - it is not my intention but I am curious as to why you think I am spamming?

Is it because the number of links I placed in one session?

Below is my justification...

I have added Crash.Net only where appropriate and related, e.g. motorsport categories we cover editorially. Our coverage is second to none and our content is just as good as the likes of AutoSport, Planet F1 etc. In some respects we are also bigger on the internet than AutoSport (based upon page impressions and market share, source HitWise, August 2007).

On top of this we have respected, high profile commentators, drivers/riders and others write for Crash.Net such as Sir Stirling Moss, Mark Blundell, Alan Henry, Troy Corser and many more recognised figures within the motorsport industry.

To ensure I didn't upset any previously linked websites, I placed our website link at the end of the lists - if you check out the link sections there are some links that shouldn't really be there, for example there are some links to imagery for sale, Planet F1 links that no longer exist etc.

Therefore I think if other websites such as AutoSport and Planet F1, can be listed why can Crash.Net be listed?

I look forward to your reply, many thanks in advance Ben.

Sticking an add blurb beside the link probably didn't help your cause, along with a complete lack of substantive edits in your user history doesn't make you seem like someone to be taken seriously, but by all means, try the semantics. --Falcadore (talk) 12:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice - I wasn't aware of it being advertising blurb as I was trying to replicate the AutoSport and other links listed (without being a straight copy). So if I go and edit the pages again will without a short descriptive will they get removed and will I get warned or banned? Finally, what do you mean by try the semantics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BenVic (talk • contribs)

Links to crash.net's main page are of no use to the reader. News sites should mainly be linked to when used as a source, but I have added this link to World Rally Championship since it meets WP:EL and might help in referencing the article. See here for a list of crash.net links in the English Wikipedia. Prolog (talk) 16:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the WRC link to Crash.Net and for sending me the links URL page. Just to clarify what you are saying, I need to link to the appropriate sections of Crash.Net (e.g. the WRC channel like you have done for me) where appropriate? As a resource Crash.Net is seen as a reliable and major contributor and our news is supplied to other websites so our content is of value to readers. We also have reporters and/or photographers at a lot of events be it F1, MotoGP, WRC etc - for example there is a reporter in Sepang covering the MotoGP test sessions. If you could please confirm that I am right in my assumptions I'd be most grateful. Many thanks in advance, Ben. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BenVic (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is not a collection of external links, so often even valid links should stay out unless there is a good, encyclopedic reason for inclusion, and to quote our guidelines: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked. If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it." Prolog (talk) 10:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]