User talk:WSEngle

Welcome![edit]

Hello, WSEngle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 18:08, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013[edit]

Your recent editing history at Choking game shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Doesn't matter whether you have the best of intentions, and use various named accounts or IPs. You're now at 3 times, and the site's inclusion is disputed by 3 different actual editors. DMacks (talk) 18:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was told to change user name so it was not webname. There is another person also wanting this on the page, we are not the same person. follow the webpage and email directly. while I am multi tasking today, I am frustraited that the links that were also listed above what I added were also removed. The sites do all work together. POWER IN NUMBERSs. please do not assume there are not other people wanting this listed on this site. WSEngle (talk) 18:54, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I am not a rude person, I speak to hundreds of people every week on this subject. Sometimes passion takes over and I may come off pushy, I will work on that. In the mean time maybe please take to heart the information on the website http://wildfarmkids.com/about/ and do with the information what you will. Even this small banter has had a ripple effect I hope you are one we may see as an ally. WSEngle (talk) 19:03, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Choking game. 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 websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. You are persisting in a slow burn edit war. You have received a warning, yet you have, yet again, added your own site to this article. Your rationale for addition is, I am afraid, spurious. However good your cause, however valid your advice, and however renowned you may feel you are as a speaker, Wikipedia is not, absolutely not, a platform for your good cause. Fiddle Faddle 21:11, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 WildFarmKids.com has integrity and will continue to operate with or without being listed on Wikipedia. We have been told by several doctors and professors that as far as they are concerned Wiki is not credible because edits on the site and can be discounted and taken down on a whim by anyone that challenges them. I find this battle to get information out to the public is not worth the grief submitted by those who don't want it published and or have no knowledge of the choking game. We have first hand information, real life experience on all levels and ability to direct questions to most qualified individuals. The information has no gender, geological or monetary class boundries. It is for all parents, family, coaches, mentors and also teachers, doctors, law officers and clergy. If someone is around youth, this is information they need. One last thing, I hope you have at least viewed the website and possibly out of curiosity have navigated through the tabs. http://wildfarmkids.com/take-action/ is what we ask viewers to do, TAKE ACTION and share what you have learned. Blessings, WildFarmKids WSEngle (talk) 22:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to understand COI[edit]

Wikipedia has stern views on Conflict of Interest, something not limited to articles, but a thing which includes being an advocate for one's own web site, or a site with which one is affiliated. Please ensure that you read the link and understand it. "We" are neither against nor for 'your' web site. We don't care about it regardless of how good, or how useful it is. What we are against is your trying to shove it into an article without considering whether the link has a place in any Wikipedia article, and without understanding that it may not be added by you because you are associated or affiliated with it. Fiddle Faddle 21:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Timetrent: I am a first hand expert in this activity. There are no DEGREES to put behind my name. The lives of children are at stake. You must not have any idea how many parents read the medical mumbo jumbo and say NOT MY KID. Well the site breaks those barrier's. WSEngle (talk) 22:22, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone as erudite as you ought to understand both the warnings and COI. WP:SOAPBOX applies here. You are in serious danger of being blocked for edit warring. Fiddle Faddle 22:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did at Choking game, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Fiddle Faddle 22:40, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:WSEngle reported by User:Timtrent (Result: ). Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 22:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a span link, nor were the other links from other informational sites about TCG that were deleted in earlier November. If a death occurs in your area and you knew about TCG, how will you live with the fact that you had the opportunity to possibly prevent that child from dying but CHOSE to remove information that brings it to an understandable level to parents. ALL because you view it as spam. take a moment, view it as through a busy parents eyes. the info is solid. You just don't understand it WSEngle (talk) 23:25, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please try very hard to understand that Wikipedia is not interested in promoting any good causes, however good they are. I am a parent. I am aware of autoerotic asphyxia and variants of it. I am aware that many supposed teenage suicides by hanging, usually male, are not all they seem. I detest the practice, and wish it were stamped out. I have been personally affected by a teenage boy;s death in this manner. But, Wikipedia is not the place to introduce sites that add no value to Wikipedia, and you may not run your (excellent in other venues) campaign here. Do not make silly accusations, please, about "This is all going to be your fault", because that is patently untrue. I will live with myself perfectly happily. We cannot save every person from him or herself.

If and when your particular cause is notable then it may have a Wikipedia article, though not written by you, please, but please stop trying to stuff it in willy nilly. Fiddle Faddle 00:54, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FIRST OF ALL SHAME ON YOU FOR PLACING THE CHOKING GAME IN A SEXUAL VENUE!!! You know nothing of this activity, for that I am sure. I will be doing an interview in the upcoming days and I will gladly quote your rationalizations about why this first hand information is not up to Wiki-snuff. I am to understand you also are lumping this with suicide and or sexual practices... I guess it would be smart if you read up on the choking game.

So Wikipedia as you messaged **Please try very hard to understand that Wikipedia is not interested in promoting any good causes, however good they are.** THIS IS A FALSE STATEMENT!!! Your site praises the pink ribbon campaigns. These are money making campaigns that line pockets of investors that promote that 100% net proceeds go toward research. ((that is the amount of money after everyone involved is paid, all the shipping and handling charges covered and don't forget the advertising cost are covered.)) So see this site promotes GOOD CAUSES!!!

P.S. You might start checking the EXTERNAL LINKS of other categories that take you to websites that actually are promoting services. You seem the nosey parker type, but I'm not telling you the ones I know of. We are educational, free, worldwide...WSEngle (talk) 06:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting quite displeased with your personal attacks and your refusal to understand how Wikipedia works. There is a huge difference between reporting on a notable campaign and allowing campaigners a soapbox upon which to stand. Please actually read what is said to you with a view to understanding it, not with a view to objecting to it. If you wish to have any traction here it is essential to work within the rules. I am aware of both colours of your choking game. They are two sides of the same pancake. Fiddle Faddle 10:43, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"both colours of your choking game. They are two sides of the same pancake."What does that even mean? the two activities are not the same, one is sexual and one is not. So get your facts straight. Your frame of thought is why parents dismiss the idea of the activity "the choking game" because parents of younger children know the child is not sexually active. do not place these in the same arena. let me also tell you, some one stupidly just edited a section removing the key information letting the reader know that these activities cause many permanent brain injuries or death ect ect ... whoever took that off replaced it with "if the strangulations stops" NEWS FLASH! there is always permanent damage, there is always scar tissue. So Mister Wizard, If I undo that are you going to re edit it to? I have a team of experts that I am in contact with and this morning it was decided that it is people like you that keep valuable information from being understood. MEANING; putting the information in words that the common person can understand, is what is needed. You disapprove of this, again your own agenda I believe. and so did the medical advisors I showed your banter toward me. A grass roots approach to advocating this is what is needed. It is about saving lives. Oh and yes above you stated Wiki doesn't care about saving lives... WSEngle (talk) 16:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the edit warring complaint about Choking game[edit]

See the result of WP:AN3#User:WSEngle reported by User:Timtrent (Result: Warned). If you continue to edit in the same way at Choking game you will be blocked from editing. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have not "edited" since the other dude went off on me. I have alerted the other campaigns on education about the choking game about this sites views on posting information. I did a screen shot just because I could not even believe the hostile attack on the information the website http://wildfarmkids.com shares with the world. WSEngle (talk) 20:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]