User talk:24.24.130.247

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I left your link in Southern California but I removed it elsewhere (House, Renting, etc.). Please do not reinsert it in other articles — that counts as self-promotion, which is not permitted. Thanks. Regards, El_C 01:30, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to use Wikipedia for advertising, you will be blocked from editing. -Willmcw 08:10, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 20:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] complaint

I have a complaint to make. I've submitted several relevant links for UCI students. One, being UCI Housing and the other Off-Campus Housing (presently removed) which points to a community website that is completely free and has been mentioned by CSUF's newspaper as a great resource for students. Furthermore, I have read your spam page on the guidelines of posting links, and I feel that due to the fact that my link points to relevant information and has non-promotional language, I should be allowed to post my link. Many people are thankful that I have created iHomeConnect as way of helping people find housing. When people like you remove quality links like mine, you are restricting the exchange of information and taking the power out of the hands of the people and giving more power to corporate entities.


I don't see how you have a case. Wikipedia is not a collection of links. The references and external links are for information cited in the article or are directly related to the article. They are not meant to connect people in any way. It is an advertisement, and as so, is spam. It is not enhancing the info in the article itself. --DanielCD 22:04, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
DanielCD -- Schools are commercial entities - they exist to make money. Therefore, when you link to them, you are advertising their services for them. Your definition is lacking as those links are there to connect the user with the school's services, which, from the visitor's viewpoint, does add greater value to the article (contrary to your definition). To restrict links to ONLY the services of educational institutions is exhibiting biased, discriminitory behavior, and therefore is a basis for a suit.
Schools are mainly public institutions, and the universities are of historical note. To say that a link to them is connecting with services is just wrong. The fact that there may be services at a site that has appropriate information...you can't make the leap and say the services are the purpose. It's a coincidence that links to universities have info and show some services, by definition that's what a univ. is. Big deal. McDonalds is a buisiness, and there's an article on that. Why? It's of note and had an impact on history.
And it's not a basis for a suit anyway. No one said you were entitled to adding that; no one has guaranteed you anything. There's no reason to even assume it. To come here and insist you have a right to use the site as your billboard is just arrogant and crass. --DanielCD 02:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
We try to keep Wikipedia free of commercial links as much as possible-- you can imagine what our pages would look like if we allowed users to add commercial links at will. Also, you might want to read our policy about making legal threats against other users Wikipedia:No legal threats. I'm curious though-- under what statute do you suppose you could sue? -- Mwanner | Talk 22:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Mwanner -- Isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to provide definitions and information that helps people? Recently I read up on ponzi scams and could not find a good example of a ponzi scam for the life of me. I'm the kind of user who when reading something likes to click links to view additional information relevant to the subject at hand. And if an editor is going to have an External Links section in his/her articles, it needs to be defined better, especially in the case of schools (most notably private).
No, the purpose is not to help people at all. It's to write an encyclopedia. --DanielCD 02:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Tim - I received your email as well as your message. Feel free to report me to whomever you like on wikipedia, as I'm sure you can see from the two responses here other users agree with my actions. With respect to your threat to sue, please read the link Mwanner provided you to Wikipedia:No legal threats. If you really want your links in the article, your best bet is to engage in constructive dialogue and not threaten other users. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 01:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm another Wikipedia administrator who would like to concur with the above editors. I would suggest you ask a lawyer for advice on whether you have a case before you continue making legal threats. Wikipedia editors will not be inclined to agree with your point of view if you continue making frivolous claims. --Ryan Delaney talk 09:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)