User talk:Matses
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Matses, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Ling.Nut 02:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] External linking and 2 of your articles
Hi. Please see the discussion at WikiProject Spam about your contributions. They've essentially set off our spam radar. I suggest you may want to comment on what you're doing with all the matses.org, amazon-indians.org and iquitosnews.com links.
Here are the rules which govern this issue:
- ”Verifiability” — a bedrock policy. In particular, see these sections:
- "Sources of dubious reliability” (the word "dubious" is a bit harsher than the tone of the actual text)
- ”Self-published sources (online and paper)”
Your photos are beautiful and some of your text pages are quite interesting. Nevertheless, your web pages just don’t meet these standards. I’m widely published on the web and mine don’t either, if it’s any consolation (my photos are much uglier, too.)
- ”Reliable sources” elaborates on what Wikipedia editors can and cannot use to meet the verifiability requirements. Again, neither my web material nor yours makes the cut.
- ”What Wikipedia is not” — in particular, see:
- ”Wikipedia is not a soapbox” for advertising or self-promotion, even for what your (or even everybody) feels is a worthy cause.
- ”Wikipedia:Conflict of interest” — this guideline says in a nutshell not to write about yourself or your organization; also don’t link to your own site. Even if my web work met the all the other rules, I could not link to it — someone else would have to. Likewise, even the Queen of England doesn’t get to edit her own article. This guideline assumes even greater importance when there's a direct financial incentive to visitor volume, ad clicks, page ranking, donations and video sales, such as what you have here.
- It also looks like the same user or users are have created the articles MATSES and Dan James Pantone -- that presents some serious conflict of interest issues, especially since these articles need more work to stay in the encyclopedia (see the comments I'll leave on the discussion pages for these articles). MATSES-associated people should stop working directly on these articles; they may, however, use the discussion pages to suggest changes and additions for neutral, third party editors to make.
- ”External links” — in particular see:
- ”Spam” — especially the sections:
You must feel as if these are a lot of links, policies and guidelines and, yes, they are. I listed them all here because there are many reasons — not just one — why links to your web pages (or mine) on Wikipedia are going to be problematic. --A. B. 02:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Matses-girl.jpg
We can't use this otherwise compelling photo with "www.matses.org" stamped on it; it will seem too spammy for some and for others it will raise questions as to whether it's truly been released into the public domain. I've temporarily removed the photo from the article. Thanks, --A. B. 02:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Final comment: thank you!
Now that I've said all of the above, your work on the content of some of these articles, especially:
is great stuff -- it's this stuff that makes Wikipedia such a useful resource.
Thanks so much for adding it. --A. B. 03:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- and if you want to make another tr at the articles, let me knowDGG 01:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your e-mails
I just got them -- they were in my spam filters. I will read over them and get back to you. --A. B. (talk) 17:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- I only just now picked up your e-mail of this morning. I just sent you a response along with a question. --A. B. (talk) 22:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Canvassing in regard to the Dan James Pantone article
Your contributions history shows that you have been aggressively cross-posting in order to influence the article on Dan James Pantone. Although the Arbitration Committee has ruled that "[t]he occasional light use of cross-posting to talk pages is part of Wikipedia's common practice"1, such cross-posting should adhere to specific guidelines found in Wikipedia:Spam. In the past, aggressively worded cross-posting has contributed towards an Arbitration Committee ruling of disruptive behavior that resulted in blocking2. It is best not to game the system, and instead respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building, by ceasing to further crosspost, and instead allowing the process to reflect the opinions of editors that were already actively involved in the matter at hand. Thank you.
As I replied on my talk page, I don't have any idea why you posted your message. I looked into it and you appear to have posted similar comments on eight other talk pages. I'm not going to put time into exploring those users' relationships to the article in question, but if you did seek out support among other non-participants, it's probably advisable that you don't do that anymore. Please familiarize yourself with the policy on canvassing as soon as you can. Erielhonan 00:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was mistakenly advised to do so. --Matses 20:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please do not remove other people's comments from your talk page, even if you don't agree with them. Comments such as the one above are meant to be instructive. Please familiarize yourself with the central points of Wikipedia's talk page guidelines. Erielhonan 02:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pantone Deletion
Hello again, Matses. I have looked back over the article again, and reviewed the "professor test." In my opinion, the "test results" are very borderline, and after some more careful consideration, I've decided that the article just isn't notable enough. Sorry. Again, I have nothing against you or your organization, I'm just simply trying to interpret Wikipedia's policy's as best I can. Best regards, P.B. Pilhet / Talk 01:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)