User talk:JimPettis

Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Jdavidb 20:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

External links

I understand that you remove incongruous links, but what criteria do you use to determine whether a link remains or not?

I am creating what I feel to be a truly useful and professional web site Bible Reviews that has information that I consider at least as valuable as that included in some of the other external links which are *not* removed by you.

Why do you remove links to web sites containing valuable information relating to the Wikipedia articles?

Why do you not remove links on these same pages to web sites containing vague, less-valuable information?

In other words, what do I have to do to make my web site worthy?

Thanks,

Jim Pettis

Hello, Jim, and welcome to Wikipedia. Odds are we have a lot of overlapping interests and maybe even skillsets.

Let me mention that you can sign and timestamp all of your comments on Wikipedia talk pages by typing four tildes after your message: ~~~~. Most of the time this is a good idea.

I greatly appreciate you pausing to talk with me before reinserting your links again. I hope I can explain why these links are not appropriate.

One number one criteria for me removing a link is that it is to your own site. I also have sites of interest that relate to various Christian articles here on Wikipedia, but it is not appropriate for me to add them because that would be me promoting my site rather than me working to improve Wikipedia articles.

Instead, you have to work on making your site relevant and informative, and promote it in some other manner. If it is truly that good a resource then it will be noticed independently by another Wikipedia editor and added in. That's the key: you can't add in your own site (or even just a site that you really want to promote).

Another key is in your own message. You say "I am creating what I feel to be a truly useful and professional web site." By this you are indicating your site isn't finished yet. It's not yet "a truly useful and professional web site." We don't need Wikipedia to link to webpages that will be useful; we need it to link to content that is useful.

As for why I have not removed other links, don't think that that implies that those links belong and yours do not. The truth is that any link that doesn't truly enhance an article and follow the criteria at Wikipedia:External links does not belong, and any link that somebody promoted just because they think they have (or will have) a really great site does not belong. The fact that they haven't been removed yet does not mean that they do not need to be removed, or that similar links can be added. Jdavidb 21:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Weasel Words

Please read WP:Weasel. If there is apparent consensus by experts in a field, we don't write "most experts". We only write "most experts" believe X, if we can cite *some* experts who don't believe X. --BostonMA ^talk 22:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]