User talk:71.167.29.181

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Princess Cruises do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Cruise ship. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. -MBK004 03:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Cruise ship. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -MBK004 04:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the recent edit you made to Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/cruisedealership.com has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 22:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Unlist request of cruisedealership.com

It appears you may be considering legal action based on this request for our "legal address".

  1. Here is a link to the Wikimedia Foundation's designated agent's address. The Foundation is the nonprofit organization that owns Wikipedia.
  2. Before taking on the expense and publicity of legal action against Wikipedia and the Foundation, I suggest you have your lawyer review the detailed chronology of your company's actions that I left for you at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Unlist request of cruisedealership.com (permanent link).

--A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC) Y Done

In addition, as a result of the following postings per Wikipedias Wikipedia:BLOCK#Protection for making legal threats.
You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for making legal threats. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia as long as the threat stands. If you believe that a legal action is warranted, you may contact our information team at info-en@wikimedia.org and they may forward it to our legal counsel or a more appropriate venue.
Administrator note: - Per this being an IP user, the block has been set at 90 days as a de facto indef block to be extended as needed per the terms of WP:THREAT.--Hu12 (talk) 07:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC).

I have been in contact with corporate and our company with draws its stance to communicate with wikimedia legal counsel. and as a reputable international cruise agency was fustrated in trying to explain that the employee of our company was simply trying to be helpfull in adding content from our website url's not realizing and not understanding your policy. as everytime he added a url it reject so he tried another one thinking that the next one would be acceptable. i have instructed all employees to avoid posting from any and all urls. All i can ask that you see that this was a mistake (which we all make), and white list our company. Best Regards, Thomas--71.167.29.181 (talk) 02:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Your comments above overlook the many times your company's representative was told to stop and the rules pointed out to him. I laid out the full chronology at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Unlist request of cruisedealership.com including a link to every single edit your guy made and every single warning he got. Click on those many links I spent a couple of hours preparing for you and you will see for yourself what went on. Based on this well-documented evidence, your representative clearly decided to stick these links in any way he could and with clear knowledge that it went against this site's rules. We were left with no recourse but to blacklist your domains and, given the history of cruisedealership.com's relentless abuse here, I for one lack any confidence that it won't recur if we don't blacklist these domains.
Our blacklisting records are required to be transparent for accountability -- we don't "secretly" blacklist any domain. So there will always be some record here. Our obligation is to ensure our records are correct and factual -- not to make them go away. We are well within our rights to do this.
At this point, I suggest you look within your organization at your company's practices to prevent recurrences with other sites. There is another, global blacklist maintained on Meta-Wiki at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist. You are currently listed only on the blacklist protecting the English language Wikipedia. The global blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. It only takes a spam report from one additional wiki to trigger blacklisting on that global blacklist. I know Google, among other search engines, peruses that blacklist when evaluating sites for linkspamming penalties; I suspect your company's record here would likely meet their criteria for linkspamming. To avoid such an outcome, you'll want to make sure your representative is not spamming these other wikis. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

As u can see we did not spam your other wiki's we did not even mean to spam this wiki. Good luck to you hope your never in a position of misunderstanding. Let the record show their was never an intent to spam, this issue was a misunderstanding as mentioned above with the different urls on different subjects relating to the page topic. Our CEO is a member on the board of directories of several associations including the Cruise Line Association [clia]. you will also notice that since our incorporation this company has numerous write ups as well, Not one other site other then wiki for ever being cited for a single spam. Also i am an author of several articles written for the cruise industry. Its a shame that a non prifit organization is this vindictive as to not understand this situation. Best Regards, Thomas--71.167.29.181 (talk) 20:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do not delete or edit or alter others comments, as you did here. Such edits are disruptive, deceptive and is considered vandalism.--Hu12 (talk) 00:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


Your kidding, all that was done was a delete of the .com off my company name. What you are doing is misrespresenting my company in a defamatory manner labeling it as spam. a misunderstanding of our placement of certain article urls to subjects which our employee thought was helpfull to certain pages should not defame us by the label in which you did.. You must understand as a open forum like this their is bound to be misunderstanding in which people can edit/delete comments and such hostility and lack of understanding is shamefull and counter productive with such labels.Not everyone is as internet savy and as educated as to what is acceptable with this new forum that we tried to be usefull too --71.167.29.181 (talk) 02:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you ever made a mistake? have you ever asked for forgiveness? have you ever been forgiven? have you ever forgave? this type of forum seems very easy to make mistakes. clearly i forgave me employee as he did not fully read your extensive policy and clearly was going by the external links in which he noticed similar links being there. he kept seeing links being deleted not figuring it was you but other readers playing around just deleting he did not fully understand. --71.167.29.181 (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

as far as vandalism once again i am unaware that deleting the .com off my company that seems to be under attack for a minor mistake is labeled as harshly as you are making it. as one would come to a conclusion that if you have access to text it can be changeable. you should really limit the access the general public has if you have such tuff policy in what can and cannot be done....--71.167.29.181 (talk) 02:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a question, if all these policy's of what can and cannot be done to the pages [ whats spam and not spam] why do you make it so easy for employees or the general public to have access so easily in that they can harm company's they work for so easily on your site. I may be not that educated on this subject but if you have a open forum that encourages people to edit and add content why not be a bit more understanding of errors to it. why do you not have more of a control atmosphere or a process in which the only way to add or edit is that must ACCEPT your policy. as no policy was introduced to the employee prior to edit. and all he kept seeing was the url deleted not knowing WHO deleted it. So to label us with as you have is unfair and not justified. Had the employee known it was a monitor of the site he would have stopped. Prior to posting their should be a acceptance of website usage .......... --71.167.29.181 (talk) 03:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

71.167.29.181, the accounts adding these links were warned over and over, what part of

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you.

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia.

{{subst:uw-spam4i}}

did your employee not understand. These warnings clearly state:

  • If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it.
  • Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia.

and more.

The first edit may indeed have been a mistake, and nothing further would have happened if the editor had actually read these warnings (e.g. user:COIBot only starts to interfere when there are more than 5 reports on a link, and most of us won't bother to report or blacklist if there are only 2 or 3 edits with link additions, we revert, warn, and go on!). Nothing would not even have happened after 2 or 3 warnings. But if the editor really persists, then indeed, we start monitoring (resulting in e.g. the User:COIBot report), start autoreverting, or start a discussion on either WT:WPSPAM or Mediawiki talk:Spam-blacklist. I hope you understand that your employee went far beyond two or three warnings, and they did not bother to actually read the warnings, but boldly repeated inserting links in stead of engaging in discussion. Now there are records, which can also be found on google (as would have been the page on your company ...), which here are used as proof for why this item was added to this blacklist. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Dirk Beetstra, No he did not fully understand as his english is not very good thats why their should have been a policy for him to accept first prior to posting and even after the url are not accepted should have prompted him to acknowledge the warning he went under the assumtion that its was ok and when urls did disappear he went ahead trying to add again as he could not figure out or understand why.... and i have expressed my appologize and assure you it would not happened again as its now as this issue is in our corporate department and out of the IT department we have reviewed this issue and do understand how this mistake can happen for a person who is not so good in english and this site permits users to edit very openly. I just Cannot believe the hard time this issue is to resolve.--71.167.29.181 (talk) 21:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Dirk Beetstra, after reviewing your terms and policy i do understand your policy and terms and the removal and ask for you to accept our firms acknowledgment and assurance NONE of our employees would ever be permmited to post anything related to our company on your boards. But i do understand that after reviewing this forum their are many related situations where commercial sites are linked and listed that would cause one to be a bit confused. I rather not continue posting as im sure this is a waste of your time and resources as well as ours. I do hope you can provide assistance to resolve this issue. Best Regards, Thomas--71.167.29.181 (talk) 23:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)