User talk:68.98.103.108

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. Feezo (Talk) 14:51, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


As you well know Feezo, there are millions of links to private websites on Wikipedia. They belong there because they are relevant. Please do not suggest that my link should not be on that page and at the same time leave the other links to other site there. You are NOT in a position to tell the world that my site should not be listed whereas competitors to my site are.

Hello and thank you for your reply — please remember that I am not advocating the inclusion or removal of any other links to private websites. Wikipedia is a big place, and there's lots of work to be done. If you want to help improve our encyclopedia, that's great — welcome! But Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising; adding links to your own site - however relevant it is - is against Wikipedia guidelines. Please see Wikipedia:External links for more information on the subject. Feezo (Talk) 00:40, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello again. Sounds like we'll be at it back and forth for all time. I will happily remove ALL links from such pages if you insist on removing just mine. It is incredibly hypocritical of you to just remove the links I post and to leave all the other commercial/spam links there. I won't have it Feezo. They all go or they all stay.
Well, luckily we don't have to "be at it back and forth for all time", as you put it — Wikipedia has an excellent dispute resolution process designed to prevent unproductive editing and counter-editing (termed edit warring.) However, I would like to try to work with you on this before we bring it to requests for comment.
As I said before, I'm not trying to be the judge of which external links are worthy for inclusion; my concern is that you are using Wikipedia to promote your site. This, bluntly, is a violation of Wikipedia policy. It is not a criticism to your site, or a defense of other commercial links in Wikipedia — if you found an editor who added dozens of links to his own competing site, you would be well in line to remove them all, and Wikiproject Spam would thank you for it. Feezo (Talk) 15:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

It looks as if the links are contrary to Wikipedia policy. But I will add: This is so typical of Wikipedia. A bunch of worthless academics deciding which of their buddies websites they are going to support through allowing advertising on Wikipedia to certain sites via "external links", but not allowing genuinely useful links to invaluable sites like Super70s.com. No wonder every serious researcher and journalist on the 'Net thinks you guys are a bunch of silly wackjobs who are afraid to join the real world. Wikipedia will always remain a second-rate resource so long as the likes of Feezo and others are allowed to fill the pages here with linkspam and weed out useful links to relevant pages. I don't need a warning from another 12 year old as I'm leaving anyway.


"my site should not be listed whereas competitors to my site are"
While this is a fair point to make, Wikipedia is not a fair or even unfair marketplace. Links are included neither to promote nor disadvantage you. If it's not encylopedic, then it should not be listed.
"They all go or they all stay"
As mentioned above, do feel free to remove commercial messages from Wikipedia.

I think Feezo has been helpful and polite in this and deserves support for his efforts. Nelson50 19:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)Nelson50

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Nlu (talk) 06:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

This is so typical of Nerdopedia. A bunch of worthless academics deciding which of their buddies websites they are going to support through allowing advertising on Wikipedia to certain sites via "external links", but not allowing genuinely useful links to invaluable sites like Super70s.com. No wonder every serious researcher and journalist on the 'Net thinks you guys are a bunch of silly wackjobs who are afraid to join the real world. Wikipedia will always remain a second-rate resource so long as the likes of Feezo and others are allowed to fill the pages here with linkspam and weed out useful links to relevant pages. I don't need a warning from another 12 year old as I'm leaving anyway.