User talk:Jameswatt

Welcome! to Wikipedia![edit]

Hello Jameswatt, this is Exir Kamalabadi, and I hope that you are having fun with Wikipedia. First of all, welcome to Wikipedia! Find something that can be improved, either in content, grammar or formatting, then fix it. Don't be afraid. Be bold! If you do something wrong, there is always someone who will clean up the mess.

Here are some links that you may find helpful:

How to edit a page
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
Manual of Style
Community Portal. You can get some work over there.
The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
What Wikipedia is not
Wikiquette, the Wikipedian etiquette

Here are also some tips that you might find useful:

Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes
Create a User page so that others can know you
Go to the Village Pump or the Help Desk if you need Wikipedia related help, or the Reference Desk for general questions.

Finally, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page when you need help!

Exir Kamalabadi ^{Join Esperanza!} 01:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in response to your question on all these talk pages, yes, I object. These are commercial links with rather minimal content, in the same vein as what we are doing here. It would be more productive to improve our own entries rather than linking to other people's. Henry ^Flower 11:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hello! Thanks for yout intention of adding the link to Satyajit Ray. Please feel free to add the link. Please rememver to add the link under the section "External links". Thanks a lot. However, please remember, do not add any overtly commercial links. Bye.--Dwaipayanc 11:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World of Biography links[edit]

Hi, you've posted virtually identical requests on the talk pages of many authors, asking if you can add a link to the World of Biography website. Your requests are (1) unsigned and (2) lack titles, so that the talk pages become disorganized. Worse, you appear to be spamming the talk pages to add a spam link to the articles. Are you a bot or something? --Akhilleus (talk) 17:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Socrates, John Dewey, etc[edit]

Yes, i do have a problem with these. Sorry, but please read WP:EL; these links add nothing that isn't in (or should be in) the articles. They are not sourced and cited; the link to Socrates starts off with the claim that He was one of the eminent philosophers who believed in God and acknowledged his sovereignty. He practiced self-denial, repressed his appetites for sensual desires and turned away from material pleasures. He went to the mountains where he dwelt in cave. He dissuaded men from worshipping idols and taught them the way to God, the Lord of Mercy, until the ignorant rose up against him. which isn't very well backed up by any of the texts. (Where, exactly, does socrates refer to the sovereignty of "the Lord of Mercy"? Dwelt in a cave?? dissuaded men from worshipping idols?) Please do not start adding these to articles. --He:ah? 09:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oh, and please don't make false claims like probably the most famous portal of biography to this article . . . It makes it sound like spam . . . --He:ah? 09:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I object to these links, for two reasons: Their accuracy (POV) and the fact that you're spamming them all over wikipedia. I assume you are 59.144.97.157 too. I will keep an eye out for linkspam from you and remove it. Nnp 10:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 2006 Spamming warning 3rd level[edit]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Scott Grayban 11:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin -- other evidence of link spamming from this user are here[1] and here[2]. --Scott Grayban 11:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires.

Scott Grayban 12:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a quick way for an admin to remove/unlink all his worldofbiography links on talk pages? He's recieving the same SEO benefit from them as he would were they in the articles. --Nnp 12:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope.. The bots and users will revert the damge as they see it hopefully. On my watchlist I reverted all them already. --Scott Grayban 13:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We specifically ask editors to add links to Talk pages rather than to articles, so that other editors can make a decision as to whether or not to add them. I'd unblock this user, if it weren't for the fact that he's using a mock-puppet to evade the block, for which his block should be extended.

Why does it bother you that his site is benefitted by these links? We're not policemen, we're admins trying to protect Wikiepdia — and the links on Talk pages are doing no harm to Wikipedia. The site is clearly worthless, being grossly, not to say childishly, inaccurate, but then the links won't be added. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't justify adding the links to lots of talk pages. There's probably no site valuable enough to link to from lots of articles that isn't already, and if so, asking in one place is still the best way. Wikipedia is not here to support people's advertising efforts, no matter how much they want us to be. A block is warranted if the spamming continues. - Taxman ^Talk 14:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually allowing the spam is unproductive and aginst the policy of WikiPedia. Users are not allow spam link even if they like it, want it, or its there own spam. WP isn't the place for that. WP is a online source for articles not spam. So your wrong as well. --Scott Grayban 15:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geez -- this user was blocked already. Why are we now arguing about it here? --Scott Grayban 15:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for a start because Mel has re-added the spam. Henry ^Flower 15:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This User talk:Mel Etitis Mel? --Scott Grayban 15:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Henry ^Flower 15:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And technically Henry ^Flower you have violated the WP:3RR as well, see[3] and thats a block offense here. You might want to read up about that before you go into a revert war again. --Scott Grayban 15:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? I haven't reverted Mel once, and don't intend to. Henry ^Flower 15:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strike all that.... Mel Etitis is a admin here and if he thinks the spam is a productive means to the goal of WikiPedia then let him be. As for me I'll be filling a complaint that he is allowing such spam even on talk pages after it was reverted. --Scott Grayban 15:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mel Etitis: Is there a reason you choose not to apply common sense to obvious linkspam? I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't let google define the internet, but allowing linkspam on talkpages only encourages more of the same, which is detrimental to WP. --Nnp 16:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nnp post your comments about this action here[4] --Scott Grayban 16:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]