User talk:89.80.247.61

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. The links you added to the page Jaguar XK have been removed. 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. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --AbsolutDan (talk) 19:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello - I removed the link primarily because we don't need more external links in our article, we need more content. I also removed the link because this is the English-language Wikipedia, so links that are in other languages aren't really appropriate unless the topic is specifically about something in that language. Furthermore, there are already 2 English-language forums in the article. That's plenty - reducing it to just one would be even better. --AbsolutDan (talk) 20:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Easy with the dramatics buddy. First off, I am myself French, but that's irrelevant. The point is, this is the English article. If French readers want to learn more, they can read the corresponding (if present) article in the French Wikipedia (which if present you could easily link to in the article). If the link you're so adament about is useful, add it to the French Wikipedia article. Or, if there is content that you can add to this article regarding, for instance, a distinguishing feature of the vehicle as it's produced or sold in France, feel free to add that. However, again, external links do not really help an article much (unless they serve as a citation for content in the article) and there is no obligation for Wikipedia to host any particular external link. --AbsolutDan (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I have just reviewed WP:EL (Wikipedia's external links guidelines), and it reminded me that links to forums should generally be avoided. (see the section "links to normally avoid", point # 12). As such, I have removed all forum links from the article. I hope this settles this issue. If you have further concerns please contact me on my talk page or bring it up on the article's talk page --AbsolutDan (talk) 20:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This dispute was the subject of a Third Opinion request. Please see the Talk:Jaguar_XK page for my response to that request. Kickaha Ota 22:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

With regards to your comments on Talk:Jaguar_XK: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KickahaOta (talk • contribs) 12:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I am truly disappointed that we haven't been able to reach an agreement on this matter. I wish I could convince you that my link removal is strictly a matter of policy & guidelines, and that I have no personal agenda here other than the betterment of Wikipedia. Prior to yesterday I have never spoken with KickahaOta. He joined this matter because I posted a request at WP:3O, which is a place to post disputes in request of a 3rd opinion. Here is a link to the request I made: [1].

I hope you can understand that no one involved in this matter, especially myself, is out to get you or bash any race, nationality, language or heritage. In fact, I hope you will consider remaining here and contributing to other articles. There are many Wikipedia articles that could benefit from someone who has knowledge of other countries and languages. I believe if you could redirect your passions from this particular link into a drive to improve other articles, you could become a truly valuable editor here. Let me state here that if you do go this route, I would be more than happy to offer you any help, advice, or other guidance you could need. Just let me know --AbsolutDan (talk) 13:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a better tone to favorize positive discussions.

My point is also to improve Wikipedia. I'm writing contributions on items I know well, but my IP adress changes regularly, so no real history.

There are two points here:

1) As a XK-owner I could find out how good and useful these three forums are. they bring huge information, to anybody looking for infos on XKs. this is why I put them in. I have no links to their owners. I still think these links bring much more positive than negative to this page. Thus I have difficulties when I see people like you cutting out these selected links, whereas you know nothing on the XK subject. this is a bit too brutal to me and does not fit with my views of what WP should be.

2) The way how you acted looked like bashing, and was in any case very brutal. Erasing pages like this is a brutality. In this case nothing justified acting so brutaly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.80.247.61 (talk • contribs)

  • You just complimented him for "a better tone to favorize positive discussions", then told him "you know nothing on the XK subject" and that he acted "brutaly"[sic]. Do you realize how that comes across? Kickaha Ota 14:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Kickaha Ota 14:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

What I meant is that I do not favor the policy of having people who do not know a subject erasing contributions of other people. This was in no way a personnal attack.

Both of your profiles show that you never contributed to the XK forum, but that you are very active in erasing items that you feel contrary to the WP.

This is ok if you know a subject. But this is not OK if you do not know it, as the risks of mistakes and injustice is huge. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.80.247.61 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Removal is just as much a part of the Wiki process as additions and changes. I'm sorry if you thought I was bashing or being brutal. However it's simply a matter of policy & procedure here to limit the linking to foreign-language sites. As KickahaOta points out, it's even in the Manual of Style, the "bible" of sorts here at Wikipedia.
Again, to help French-speaking readers, you can always write or edit the corresponding article in the French-language Wikipedia, and then add a link to the French article here. Then, readers could smoothly transition from the English version of the article to the French version, and then follow any useful links to French-language websites. That is the harmony that we try to reach here at Wikipedia. While I have no experience with the French-language Wikipedia, I could certainly help you link to the corresponding French-language article if you could locate or write it. Just let me know! --AbsolutDan (talk) 15:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I am also sorry if you feel this is personal. You seem to believe that, by removing the forum link, I am saying that is not useful. You keep commenting in the revision history that "The 3 forums bring useful information and are thus conform to WP policy.") That is simply not the case. Certainly, facts (and links) should be useful to the reader. But if every fact and link about a subject that might be useful were included in an article, the result would be an impossibly long article. So the Wikipedia guidelines -- especially the Wikipedia:Manual of Style -- aren't just about removing content that isn't useful; they're about deciding what things should be omitted -- even though they might well be useful -- in order to produce a reasonably short, neutral article. It's very important to keep that in mind. If you interpret any edit or removal of your contributions as a judgement that they are not useful, you will severely misinterpret the process, and you will wind up feeling that people are against you when in fact they are not. Kickaha Ota 15:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

There is a matter of policy that I have to bring to your attention. Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. --AbsolutDan (talk) 15:19, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, this 3RR rule is new to me, I did not intend break it...

But somehow by acting like you did you bropught me (intentionaly?) to that.

On the other hand, Kickahohata broke it also, or is he allowed to that for some reason?

Anyhow, I'm tired of your attitude and will leave you the place, it's become too antidemocratic and too dictatorial. Have fun and od whatever you like to this page, I do no more care.

Adieu.

  • For the record, I am very sorry to have inadvertently violated WP:3RR, and have reported myself for discipline. I am also sorry to see this user go. Kickaha Ota 16:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I acknowledge that you might have been unaware of 3RR; as such I only left the warning above, I had/have no intention of reporting you for it unless you continued to revert the article. If you must go, I do hope that after a time you will decide to return and make other contributions here. --AbsolutDan (talk) 21:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links to fora

In general, links to fora are not encouraged at wikipedia, please see WP:EL#Links_to_normally_avoid. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 23:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)