User talk:Merrymedia

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello Merrymedia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Link spam

Hi - its not my website. A fan yes but not mine. Why not post the link? Other websites are allowed to why not this one?

Hi, please stop posting links to your website everywhere, this is classified as spam, and they are being removed. --Kiand 16:26, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

why

but i think its good, i work in radio and its handy website for tv news. ill not do it again and remove the links but can u let the article stay as it is an encyclo after all.

Hi - its not my website. A fan yes but not mine. Why not post the link? Other websites are allowed to why not this one?

Because its a: not notable and b: not relevant. --Kiand 16:39, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

k

but i think its good, i work in radio and its handy website for tv news. ill not do it again and remove the links but can u let the article stay as it is an encyclo after all.

Ill remove the links added - i was probably getting carried away but can the article stay?

Do not remove AfD tags from articles

Please do not remove the Articles for Deletion notification from the top of articles. This is considered vandalism. If you disagree with what a tag is telling you, please follow the advice on that tag in order to save the article. Do not just delete it. If you need and help or advice on this or any other editing matter, please contact me on my talk page and I'll be happy to help out. ➨ ❝R E DVERS❞ 16:55, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Its funny how you say that - i am a member on merry media and def do not own it. I emailed merry media earlier and got a very sarcastic reply along the lines of 'great publicity' but 'ignorant way of doing it'. Sod them. I thought i was doing them a favour and end up looking silly! I do apologise and will not do it again.

okay

Its funny how you say that - i am a member on merry media and def do not own it. I emailed merry media earlier and got a very sarcastic reply along the lines of 'great publicity' but 'ignorant way of doing it'. Sod them. I thought i was doing them a favour and end up looking silly! I do apologise and will not do it again. I can't provide a case, only they can and by the looks of it don't care less. Ill remove the links added - i was probably getting carried away but can the article stay?

Probably not. It looks like the consensus is to delete. It's important to not take this personally. Decisions to delete are not about personalities, they're about whether the subjects are worthy of coverage in an encyclopedia. In this case the issue is notability, and although this is a tricky things to sort out, it's also one of the most important criteria for coverage. If you think this article should stay, then you need to make some sort of case that Merry Media is notable. The idea that other non-notable subjects exist is not an argument that your article should stay--it simply underlines the fact that Wikipedia is drowning in spam and articles about trivial subjects. That's a problem, not something that argues in your favor.

You have undermined your own case, unfortunately, by doing a couple things that disincline people to trust you. The merrymedia linkspam, making all your contributions about Merry Media, naming yourself "Merrymedia" but insisting that it's not your site... all those things indicate to experienced Wikipedians that your main purpose here is to promote Merry Media and that you're not being honest about it. If that's not true, as you claim, then I recommend you let this one go, read around the site a bit, try to improve a few existing articles and read some talk pages, and try to reestablish your bona fides (and in the process get to understand the nature of this place a little better). One of the guiding principles here is "don't bite the newbies," and I understand you're feeling a bit like that's exactly what's happened. But you have to realize that you've done a very convincing imitation of a spammer, and you have some work to do to shake that off.

I hope you can put this behind you and stick around. Good luck! rodii 01:09, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

member

You are correct though, life moves on lol - I have learned a few lessons and will make lots of contributions to wiki, but first and foremost I will re-register with a proper name! thanks.

Its funny how you say that - i am a member on merry media and def do not own it. I emailed merry media earlier and got a very sarcastic reply along the lines of 'great publicity' but 'ignorant way of doing it'. Sod them. I thought i was doing them a favour and end up looking silly! I do apologise and will not do it again. I can't provide a case, only they can and by the looks of it don't care less.

Sorry this turned out that way. Shake it off! I'm sure you have a lot of other contributions to make. rodii 01:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

correct

You are correct though, life moves on lol - I have learned a few lessons and will make lots of contributions to wiki, but first and foremost I will re-register with a proper name! thanks.

I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!

Please stop putting that link into this article - it is not suitable. Please see WP:EL for more information. Thanks/wangi 14:04, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is suitable, it is relevant to the article as it provides the latest news for that programme. The other 2 links are not updated as often when the programme isnt on air. Merry Media does, therefore relevant as it has its own section. So please do not remove it as it counts as vandelism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merrymedia (talk • contribs) 2005-12-08 14:21:59

The two linked sites are the official sites. Wikipedia is not a news source or a propaganda machine, see WP:ISNOT. Please, explain why you think the URL should be listed, using the rational in WP:EL. Also it is common practice, even on your own user talk page, to sign all comments with ~~~~. Thanks/wangi 14:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have given reason and I find it a suitable one. Please stop deleting it or I'll start browsing through your edits and changing them. It works both ways a bit of lee way. I find it suitable as its the only site that covers the show every day of the year. The officials don't so not worth the bother and gives no argument for them being on either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merrymedia (talk • contribs) 2005-12-08 14:40:57

Again, please sign your edits. Wikipedia has guidelines and policies for a reason - it is not a dumping ground for anything anybody thinks is useful - it's an encycopedia, not a blog. If you have any information that you think should be on the Celebrity page then please edit the article and add it (although don't just copy it!). I notice other editors also share my views regarding the "linkspamming" you are doing - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merry media - so the ball is firmly in your court to explain and rationally argue why the links are suitable.
Also making threats really isn't the way things are done - Assume good faith. Might I suggest you read through the links given in the Welcome section above so you can learn more about how Wikipedia works.
Thanks/wangi 15:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will echo what wangi says. Threatening vandalism is an excellent way to ensure you are blocked. External links are, in many cases, used to validate information in the article. The two other links on that page are the official webpages for the show. --Syrthiss 16:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here! External Links

As previously discussed this link isn't really appropriate in this article, please do not add back.

You may not realise it, but Wikipedia has its own house style defined in Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Please be careful to follow its advice. All edits that don't will be changed to match what our MoS recommends. Thanks/wangi 12:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't make threats of anything, I either do it or don't. Vandalism works but even more so when the person who blames one for vandalism is ruddy doing it him/herself. Ok - I'll not re-add it. Now, What test are you referring to? User:mm 13:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merrymedia (talk • contribs) 2005-12-09 13:05:45[reply]

Appologies, I added in the wrong template. Updated now. You still aren't signing your posts correctly - what you need to type is simply four tilde characters - ~~~~ - Wikipedia then automatically puts in your username and date, in your post above you're linking to another users page... Thanks/wangi 13:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are making edits to Wikipedia which are breaking the Manual of Style house style which users are supposed to follow. Please stop. These are the agreed rules which everyone abides by. Continuous changing of content in articles to break agreed-upon MoS rules, when you have been asked to stop, is often seen as vandalism. Constant vandalism may lead to you being blocked from editing Wikipedia. wangi 17:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't warn me. Your in the wrong and you can get as many of your friends on here as you like to back you up. Your the only vandal I see sitting back watching to see if I place the link back just because 'you' don't agree with it. Merrymedia 22:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

warn

Don't warn me. Your in the wrong and you can get as many of your friends on here as you like to back you up. Your the only vandal I see sitting back watching to see if I place the link back just because 'you' don't agree with it. Merrymedia 22:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

13th December 2005

Please STOP adding link spam to articles. Stephenb (Talk) 15:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:82.40.44.2

Editing without logging in doesn't stop you getting tracked. Stop adding spam links, logged in or not. --Kiand 12:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Buckiethistlefc.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Buckiethistlefc.gif. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

The following images also have this problem:

Image:Dalbeattiestar.gif

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Queensparkfc.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Queensparkfc.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]