User talk:Deli nk/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Deli nk/archive1, 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!  - UtherSRG (talk) 11:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the welcome.Deli nk 12:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome and Thanks

Welcome to wikipedia. Thanks for reverting Ariel Sharon to the correct version I was about to check to work out exactly which version to fix my revert up to as at first it seamed that IPs might of only vandalised but on realising it was -100 bytes I went to work out which version to revert to. You might want to join the counter vandalism unit If you need any help with anything (at your rate I dont think you will) just leave me a message on my talk page --Adam1213 Talk + 23:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spam Link?

How is it a spam link? On Omega-3. It looked like a quality link to me.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.41.37.146 (talk • contribs).

You have repeatedly added links to that blog to multiple articles. It has been repeatedly and quickly removed by many different individuals. It's time you realized that the consensus is that a blog whose sole purpose seems to be to promote the use of fish oil and the sale of fish oil is not an appropriate reference for an encyclopedia article. If you have information to add to the articles, go ahead and add it. But when your only contibution to Wikipedia is doing nothing but adding links to the same website to articles over and over and over, you're a spammer. Deli nk 14:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It's a blog I read regularly and it is highly relevant to fish oil. It is not my site. How am I a spammer? The site doesn't exist for the sole purpose of selling fish oil. In fact, they didn't even have ads on the site until a couple months ago. It seems you are on a witch hunt and are removing highly useful websites. Also, if you bothered to follow the discussions of the entries I edited, rather than just skimming my edit history, you would know that I am REMOVING spam links, not adding them. I challenge you to find me a website more relevant to fish oil than Fish Oil Blog. By removing it you are doing wikipedia users a disservice! The fact that ads exist does not mean it is solely for the purpose of selling fish oil. Do your research! I know it is effortful to bring a high level of discrimination to editing these entries, but Wikipedia users shouldn't suffer due to your laziness. You seem to be on a witch hunt and are speaking and acting entirely out of ignorance! --71.41.37.146 15:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You seem to be missing the whole concept of consensus. Deli nk 18:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spam Link?

Why are you removing a link that goes to a website that you can search "steel" and get over 5 thousand results of various steels. This would be good for any engineer who is interested in a specific type of steel with specific properties. I'm just trying to give people who are interested in steel more options. 207.42.85.70 18:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

See WP:EL Deli nk 21:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
If you look at the site, it's a database that is very useful to these products. It does not qualify as one of the links not to add. This site seems to have a lot of admins who just remove links. You may have looked at the link or you may not have. I have seen other materials that have links to sites like this. So if you don't remove those, then its unfair to remove mine. Understand that most people are trying to give links to good information that people can use. 207.42.85.70 14:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Caffeine

I presume that you were trying to tidy up and somehow got the wrong version. I reverted the article to my last version again. The text the new users is trying to add is a copy and paste from a coffee company web site. --GraemeL (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Men's Wearhouse

I am not sure why you deleted that link at Men's Wearhouse—it certainly looks legitimate to me. Please advise. Cheers, Dick Clark 20:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk

Just a friendly reminder, don't forget to sign your messages and warnings with four tildes to include your username as well as the date. Mrtea (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm...as far as I know, I have always signed my messages. Can you let me know where I didn't? Deli nk 11:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed new section on Kevin Trudeau

Hiya, I like your new section. But it can only be put back if you can find a verifiable source which mentions that criticism. - RoyBoy 800 15:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

OK. I'll find a reference. Deli nk 18:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliate Marketing Article

Hey, thanks for removing the casino spam link from the Affiliate marketing Article. You also removed the other link which I added (next to a lot of content and references etc.), with the comment, that I would like to hear opinions about it before it just gets removed. I was there when we had the long discussions about what site to add. It's tough. The Dmoz link was the only compromise to have at least one further pointing resource for readers of the article. I am building currently a massive collection of, for the most part, free resources for affiliate marketing and more. Not just a collection of links, but stuff like an aggregated new feed that merges various leading industry news sources into one convenient feed, also a public Google calendar with industry events. I am going to add the link again. See ya at Talk:Affiliate marketing. Cheers, --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 05:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

OK. I won't object to adding it back in. Deli nk 11:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, and honestly, check the resource page(s) out and let me know what you think. If you see anything that I missed, tell me and I will add it. Thanks again. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 11:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliate Marketing Article Discussion - Invitation to Participate

Your Contribution History shows that you have some interest in the content and the quality of the Article Affiliate marketing. The Concern has been expressed that this article or section is missing information. An open discussion was started at the articles talk page and I would like to invite you to participate in this discussion and express your opinion regarding the issue that was raised. Sincerely. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 09:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link I've put up

I've put up this link countless times, www.gotalkmoney.com/topsavingsaccounts. Let me get this straight, I don't OWN this site and the other sites stink. Besides bankrate.com, this is the only other site that constantly updates their list. So if you're going to delete my resource, delete the others, they don't serve a purpose!

Good suggestion. When I see them, I'll remove them too. Deli nk 14:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] did i give u sleepless nights

hi Deli, sorry if my "innocent editing" troubled u. I don't mind your removing the links i added, as a matter of fact I appreciate your efforts to keep this place clean. I have used wiki for many many projects and other works and it would not have been same without ppl like you. Please don't mind my "spamming" :-) , i just felt that the lucky bamboo page was not complete and so just wanted to help in some way, and I got little carried away that why someone found the link unrelated after it was there for 3-4 weeks. I just thought some non-member removed it(the plant photo is also missing). anyway, how relevant the link is should not matter since its my link and I didn't know that members can't add their own links. won't happen again, though I might ask my readers to add the site here if they find it relevant :-) Jacksmith123 16:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Energy Drink Links Section

I am relatively new here. I have been using Wiki for some time as I am a college student and there is a plethora of information available. Before I posted the external link to the energy drink blog, I made sure that I was not the only one. There are several other links to energy drink sites in the external link section. Also before I posted I read the discussion on that page to see if the issue has come up before. This is what I found:

"There should be some method to sorting the external links section. I believe the reviews are relevant information that make sense for inclusion since many people looking up these drinks on wiki are looking for information on specific drinks or a recommendation. While wikipedia is not there to recommend it should provide relevant information on where they should look."

So I am not the only one that feels these external drink reviews are relavant. Beeing new I don't want to offend any senior editors. I would love to contribute more information to the energy drink article, but I figured I would start small since I am learning the ropes. I would love to here your further thoughts.

Thank You

In general, links to personal reviews are not recommended for Wikipedia articles. And adding lots of links to a single website is generally considered spamming. The best thing to do with potentially controversial external links is to mention on the article's talk page that you would like to add it, then if no one objects, go ahead. Hope this helps. Deli nk 19:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] The link to R- fitness.

I not a writer, I am a trainer and I have decided to share my knowledge with people who cannot afford to have a trainer or just want get a few tips on how to get fit. I based in London. Anyone who logs onto my website can view a free monthly workout video www.r-fitness.co.uk. If you navigate through my website you will see that I am not selling anything. I am just a trainer trying to share what I know best “fitness”. My income is from personal training and it is very restricted to the London area. I am already a very busy trainer and there are only so many hours I can work in a day therefore I am not trying to get clients from Wikipedia. In my career, I see alot of unhealthy and unfit people who I hope to help and I am merely offering free advice and free training to help a society that is becoming obese and unhealthy. I am sincere in trying to share my knowledge. For these reasons, I have created the page General Fitness Training on Wikipedia. I do not understand why you keep deleting my external link when I am offering a free service without looking for any financial gain in return.Thanks Ricardo Macedo

[edit] Carrot juice posting

Hi - sorry not to be a bit more helpful but I find this sort rather unclear (the Cape Verde ones referred to earlier were sort of similar - could be useful but multiple postings from IP addresses - it irritates me). The reason for this tho is to say thanks for the weblinks search bit. Hadn't found it for myself so it's appreciated. Take care -- Nigel (Talk) 17:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliate Marketing - External Links Section Preview

Hey Deli,

Please have a look at the preview of External Links at the Affiliate Marketing Talk Page and let me know what you think about the selected sites and their description. Please also state if you agree to their addition to the Article or not. Thanks --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 13:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

I am a little confused by two messages I received (one from yourself, and one from a bot) claiming I had vandalised Lawrence Sheriff School's page. (Your exact message "Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.") Besides never having heard of the school, I have no will to vandalise any pages whatsoever. Apparently signing up is an easy way to solve the apparent IP confusion that seems to have occurred, so I have just done that. Can you explain why I received the message? Thanks - Duklai

Without knowing which IP you refer to, I have no way of knowing what edits may have resulted in the warnings you saw. But if you are using a computer that is shared by multiple individuals or an ISP that assigns the same IP to many different people (such as AOL), you should think of those warnings as being directed at "individuals using this IP" rather than at "you" specifically. The best way to avoid this confusion, as you've already discovered, is to sign up for an account so that you don't get caught up in any consequences from vandalism done by anonymous users. Deli nk 20:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Revert to the revision prior to revision 74521260 dated 2006-09-08 13:28:42 by Jonpaulwade using popups)"

I have noticed that you have removed some edits that I made to Rossnowlaghand Physical Fitness. You also seemed to have removed some else for the same reason. I have not added anything to Wikipedia that would cause a pop-up (I don't even know how to make a pop up if I wanted).

Update - Hi, after reviewing Wikipedia:External links I now understand why the links were removed i.e. that they are impartial as owned by me. Maybe I shall upload one photo to add to the page instead. I admit I failed to read all the rules the first time I logged in. I thought that my link would provide extra useful information.

Thanks, Jon.

[edit] Be careful with deletions

You labelled Contra body movement for deletion without checking article's history. In fact, it was trivially vandalized. `'mikka (t) 01:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Ooops. Thanks for catching that! Deli nk 18:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Varenicline

I've permanently blocked Dr Allen. He is a linkspammer, pure and simple, who could not keep his paws off Wikipedia despite numerous reverts and warnings. JFW | T@lk 17:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Careful

Please be more careful - [1]. Thanks. JBKramer 20:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Yikes! Thanks for catching that. Hopefully I've fixed it correctly. Deli nk 20:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linkspam?

Hi, Deli nk. I saw your comment in User talk:Wccaccamise and thought you might be interested in checking out the contributions of User:William charles caccamise sr, md; they appear to be the same person. Cheers! -AED 20:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:EL fix to Coffee

Careful there...in addition to removing the link for valid WP:EL reasons, your edit also reverted away a another edit that was unrelated and was a worthwhile change. DMacks 13:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Thank You

 For offering your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lori Klausutis (third nomination). The article was deleted. "The quality of mercy is not strain'd . . . It is enthroned in the hearts of kings, It is an attribute to God himself; And earthly power doth then show likest God's, When mercy seasons justice." ~ Wm. Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Act IV Scene 1. Morton devonshire 22:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deprodded H. T. Chen

I've only found 1 good citation but I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. What do you think? --Mereda 17:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That's one more than I was able to find. I have no objections to the de-prodding. Thanks. Deli nk 19:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Hi Deli nk, and thanks for your participation at the recent RfA, which did not succeed. For those of you who expressed their support, your kind words and your trust are sincerely appreciated. For those who were opposed --especially those who offered their constructive criticism-- please accept this message as assurance that equally sincere efforts, aimed at enhancing the quality and accuracy of representations within the Wikipedia, will continue. Striving for improved collaboration and consensus will also continue, with all of your insights in mind, while applying NPOV ideals as fairly and reasonably as possible. Ombudsman 05:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Careful with tagging for speedy deletion

Please be careful when tagging articles for speedy deletion as you did for 1-2. The revision you tagged was a recent change to the article and the reverts now made fix the vandalism. Martin Hinks 16:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. Deli nk 16:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Church notability

I've started a page on notability guidelines for local churches. You can join the discussion here: Wikipedia:Notability (local churches and other religious congregations) Lurker oi! 11:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Gazebo

Hi there. Please stop removing the anecdote "Eric and the Dread Gazebo" without discussion. I appreciate that the gazebo page is often subject to vandalism, but the gazebo anecdote is significant in its particular subculture and has no other obvious home. I would be more than happy to see an abbreviated version, if you would care to provide the same. I have not restored the anecdote as yet, to allow you time to state your case for its removal, but I will do so within the week if there is no response from you. 172.142.236.237 01:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I replied at Talk:Gazebo. Deli nk 13:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chemicals that you prodded

I removed the prod for those chemicals, not because I know that they should be kept, but because I think it's something that should be discussed at AfD instead. Or possibly with WP:Chem. Mister.Manticore 07:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, that's fine with me. Deli nk 18:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed aromatherapy reference

On Absolutes, you removed the external reference Essential Oils - Methods of Extraction, claiming it wasn't used for the article. However, I used that page to help understand the different types of extraction processes and explain the particular one used for Absolutes. In other words, it was used for the article.

Is there some other way I should be referencing it besides putting it in external references?

Thanks. Brainsik 02:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion that website did not seem to be a reliable source - and it is ad-heavy too. This is typically the kind of link to avoid. But I guess if you found it a valuable resource, and there isn't a more authoratative reference available, I won't object if you want to re-add it. Deli nk 15:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I found a non-commercial reference and added it. Brainsik 14:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Deli nk 15:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 67.159.34.220

I am trying to remove .com commercial sites myself to avoid advertising.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.159.34.220 (talk • contribs).

Your last edit removed alot more than just the external links. I don't know if that was intentional or not. I removed the last warning I added to your talk page - somehow I mistook that last edit as re-adding the same link you kept adding to other articles. Also, some .com sites are appropriate, so don't just remove them all. Please read WP:EL. Deli nk 20:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] lamotrigine

I'm re-adding Lamotrigine page at a consumer-run psychiatric drug information site to the lamotrigine article. Significant portions of my rewrites and additions are based on info from this site, even down to such things as international brand names. I'll re-add it as a ref to cut down on people trying to pull it in future. -- Akb4 19:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it. If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

My monobook.js does not contain any mention of a category - the word "category" does not appear in it at all. I don't know how or why it would end up in that category. Can you (or anyone else who sees this) help me figure out what to do about it? Deli nk 02:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] your message to jinky32

Hi, thanks for your note re external links. I think it's little unfair that you've removed all of my contributions linking to a creative commons open content site. Another moderator has thanked me the contribution to the Caravaggio article and now that contribution has been taken off. The site that I am linking to is not commercial and receives no financial benefit from increased visitor numbers - each link I added provides a valid and very relevant contribution to the material on wikipedia - at least as much as the other external links on the articles. I'm not trying to be argumentative - just put my point across :) --Jinky32 16:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the polite reply. It's nothing personal, but to me your activity has come across as an attempt to advertise that website - nearly all your contributions have been creating articles about Openlearn and adding links to the website, which is pretty much the definition of linkspamming. If you haven't seen it already, WP:EL has guidelines about adding external links to Wikipedia articles, including the rule, "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked." I don't know for certain if this applies to you, but it appears so. If you have gotten support for the addition of the link to an article, I won't object to you readding it though. Deli nk 16:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] reply

thanks for this. i understand your decision. if you get a chance to take a look at the site though maybe you'll change your mind - the openlearn site is a creative commons project aimed at widening partipation to education worldwide. we gain nothing financially from increased visitor numbers, and the links that i added to the external links section are directly relevent to the article. Anyway, best wishes nonetheless! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jinky32 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Your deletion of links in Congo African Grey

You went to delete the link to Tinkerbell website that I restored. What is your knowledge of parrots and of Congo African Grey in particular that you deem yourself fit to judge what should be in there? Do tell me on what criteria did you define Tinkerbell webpage as 'spam' to be deleted?

Shanlung 23:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I never called it spam. I do think it is an inappropriate external link though. Please see WP:EL. And obviously I'm not the only one that sees it that way since someone else removed your website as well. Deli nk 14:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting Talk:United States

Why did you revert that users edits. They had two somewhat legitimate complaints about the article itself. The third nonesnsical bit should have been cleaned up with an {{unsigned}} or perhaps removed, but the other two parts of that edit were acceptable according to WP:TALK, which also says you should not remove comments by other users. Maybe I've missed something, but that seemed like an inappropriate revert. i kan reed 18:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

All the edits of those two users look like childishness. The two usernames are probably the same person too. I'm surprised that you see it differently. If you disagree you can add their edits back in. Deli nk 18:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)


Sorry. Don't know how to talk to other users on Wikipedia.

Look, I am adding links to a site I'm a member of and it is important to me that the links stay there. I beileve the site is very useful and informative. Hell, check it out yourself.

Please click on these links, WP:EL and WP:SPAM, and read guidlines for the addition of external links to Wikipedia articles, particularly the section on what not to add. Deli nk 19:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Salvia divinorum forums

In general, links to discussion forums are considered inappropriate for Wikipedia articles. That line in WP:EL makes an exception for forums that are themselves the subject of the article. For example, the article about the web forum YTMND could have a link to the YTMND. So I think the links I removed should probably go, but I won't revert. Deli nk 19:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

---

OK thanks. I misread what it was saying as "shares the same subject", but scanning it again I can see your interpretation is strictly correct. So in that case I'd maybe argue more generally for exception, e.g. along WP:IAR lines or some such. The forums are part of the overall Salvia phenomena, worthy of inclusion on that basis perhaps.

--SallyScot 21:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I'll leave it up to you and others that have put so much effort into maintaining that article. Deli nk 15:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The vandalism warning you gave me

There was no vandalism. The information I added to the Byron Coley article was accurate. I have restored it along with a cite - the only cite in the article, in fact. Please be more careful in the future about making such accusations. TortureIsWrong 17:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

My aplogies. That's got to be the first non-vandalous Chuck Norris edit in Wikipedia history. Deli nk 18:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/e/l/User_talk%7EDeli_nk_archive1_652e.html"