User talk:Shadowthedog

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Shadowthedog, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DickClarkMises 18:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:Linkspam[edit]

By adding your link to 30+ pages you have identified yourself as a linkspammer. With very rare exceptions, an external link should be added to only one or two appropriate pages. I suggest you delete the superfluous ones, lest you risk all the links being deleted by the spam watchers. If the link is your own, you need to put it on the talk page first and let someone else add it if it is worthy. Wikipedia is not a collection of links. Pollinator 01:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am rolling back all these link additions. Please add links that specific add value to an article and that is closely related to the subject only. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 01:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Tom Harrison ^Talk 11:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you have readded the links again. This is your last chance. Any more linkspamming and you will be blocked indefinitely. Thank you. --Woohookitty^(meow) 08:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, we're pretty strict when it comes to External links. The problem with the site you are linking to is that it's tangential. It's nothing directly involved with the article itself. Wikipedia is not a link repository. Even our featured articles only typically have 5 or 6 external links, if that. Here is another guideline you can take a look at it. Again, the site you are adding is not directly related to these sites. If we allowed links like yours, well then, we could then include any societies similar to the C. S. Lewis Society or the Independent Institute. We have to have limits. And unfortunately, neither site you are linking to is within those limits. "The sites mention these topics occasionally" isn't enough. It has to be more direct than that. An article from those sites is one thing. Just a general link is another. --Woohookitty^(meow) 00:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find a link to an article that can help the article, link the article. But we do not do general external links. The link you put in for self-ownership is an example. It doesn't even mention Lewis much less include an article link. We just don't do general external links like that. --Woohookitty^(meow) 02:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shadowthedog,

I would like to add to the comments above that Wikipedia does not allow adding links to your own site; this is explained at Wikipedia:External links. I noticed that the sites you have been adding are registered to the same person and Oakland, CA address.

I realize that you may honestly feel the links are valuable, but the rules against adding one's own sites are based on Wikipedia's policy of neutrality; people naturally find sites they are involved with to be valuable. If you feel a particular link is especially appropriate, you may ask on the relevant talk page for a neutral editor to add it.

If there's anything I can do to clarify Wikipedia's policies or if you think I misunderstood the situation, please let me know. Wmahan . 05:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The policies here have been hammered out over time, to serve the community. You have the potential to make valuable edits here, but will not be allowed to do so, if you persist in writing your own rules. It is plain that your primary purpose here now is not to edit, but to add links to your sites, and Wikipedians really, really frown on that. Look again at the links I originally gave you for a fuller explanation of policies. Do not add any further links without discussion on the article's talk pages, or you will be blocked from editing. Pollinator 07:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

This account has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jurtal. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shadowthedog (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not a sockpuppet. I am an individual user. I don't particularly plan to post anymore as I have concluded this isn't the right forum for me, but consider the warning about links, etc. above as taken, and kindly correct your error in identifying this account as a duplicate. It is the only one I have. Shadowthedog (talk) 18:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The technical review provided in the SPI shows otherwise, and if not a sock, them WP:MEAT clearly applies. As you have no intent to edit further, there's no requirement to unblock. Perhaps after this short week has expired, you will have read the purpose and rules of Wikipedia a little clearer and choose to return to editing using the entire set of rules and policies (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Shadowthedog. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]