User talk:84.75.130.173

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome== ==Welcome! 2 Cheating in Counter-Strike 2.1 External Links to Avoid 3 Willy on trolls

[edit] Welcome== ==Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and gives you many benefits, including:

• The use of a username of your choice, provided that it is appropriate.
• The use of your own personal watchlist to which you can add articles that interest you.
• The ability to start new pages.
• The ability to rename pages.
• The ability to edit semi-protected pages.
• The ability to upload images.
• The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website.
• The eligibility to eventually become an administrator.
• Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes (~~~~), which will let others know who left it. Alphachimp ^talk 04:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cheating in Counter-Strike

If you read WP:EL the website you keep adding is not appropriate.

[edit] External Links to Avoid

• In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.
• Sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.

Also see WP:NOT:

Wikipedia is not a Mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. See Wikipedia:External links and m:When should I link externally for some guidelines.

There's already enough links in the article, we don't need any commercial ones that require you to 'buy' cheats. So unless you can find somewhere on the website that offers additional information regarding Cheating in Counter-Strike it can only be a useless spam link.--Andeh 09:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's only for verifying purposes only it should belong in the references section, yet I don't know what on the site msxsecurity.com the wiki article cites. It can't be put in the External Links section because of the reasons I put in my first message.--Andeh 19:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh and I think we should carry on this discussion on the talk page of the article. Possibly copy and paste the messages there.--Andeh 19:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know I've removed the msxsecurity.com link as well. The whole links section of that article needs cleaning up, but that one particularly stands out as a commercial site selling a product, and it does not add useful information for the casual reader of an encyclopedic article (which is the point of EL's in WP). Petros471 22:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

In an article regarding cheats, a link to a site offering cheats, commercial or not, is certainly not spam. Please do not remove valid content from the article, it is vandalism. 84.75.130.173 01:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Please stop adding commercial links to Wikipedia, as you did in Cheating in Counter-Strike. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. User:Andypandy.UK 00:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

You haven't provided any legitimate reasons why it should be there apart from that there isn't enough links to dwarf the article. You've added a lot of content in the past, see WP:OWN. You say the site is needed to verify what is in the article, yet I can't find anything useful on the site which could possibly be in the article.

...cheats... 84.75.130.173 01:37, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, cheats that you must pay for. WP:EL - "Links to normally avoid, Sites that require payment to view the relevant content., strike three. I couldn't see any payment involved in the other sites listed, only this one making it stick out like a sore thumb.User:Andypandy.UK 03:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The style guide does not apply here: That particular site is important to link to BECAUSE it is a commercial site. A commercial cheat site. It is one of those "seeing is believing" things. When it comes down to it, the article forwards a number of arguments, that while accepted by cheat / anti cheat experts and authorities, is often rejected by 'laypeople' and denied by others. Something like "commercial cheat sites" is such a thing - To increase the credibility and verifiability, the link should be included. I have absolutely no idea or understanding why you think you are in the position to move in here and start randomly vandalizing the external links. 84.75.130.173 06:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

You still haven't provided me with which parts of the article refers to the content on the website. I don't think you understand that just because it's a site related to the article it belongs there. Notice on article Cheating in online games and Cheat code, not a single cheat site is linked to. There are only wikilinks to websites that have been deemed notable.--Andeh 07:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I have quoted exactly from policies/guidelines: (WP:SPAM & WP:EL)

• In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.
• Sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.

The only legitimate reason the link should be in the article is in the references section, but you haven't shown me which part of the website the article cites.--Andeh 01:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Willy on trolls

You may indeed have a point in this comment; but, whatever its merits, it is a comment rather than a statement of useful fact. So it would be better if you removed it. You'd be welcome to plonk it on the accompanying talk page. -- Hoary 04:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I have removed it. And by the way, it didn't make perfect sense; Willy isn't considered a vandal because he has a "different opinion than others", he is considered such because he has made an effort to cause trouble on Wikipedia.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I was just commenting on the general Wikipedian habit of immediately suspecting everyone to be in fact a sockpuppet. A form of Wikiparanoia, if you ask me. I would move the text to the talk page, but I subsequently created User:Trolling on Wheels! as some sort of WP:POINT, which immediately got me blocked... 84.75.130.173 05:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

---

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. [IP info · Traceroute · WHOIS · Abuse · City · RDNS] · [RIRs: America · Europe · Africa · Asia-Pacific · Latin America/Caribbean]