User talk:Elijahtmorgan
June 2009
[edit]
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Pulp Fiction (film). 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 the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. 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. Ward3001 (talk) 02:06, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Seven Samurai. 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. Ward3001 (talk) 02:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- OK my error. I shall add these links only to the talk page. Apologies. The Auteurs is a Wikipedia verified online film distribution and review website.--Elijahtmorgan (talk) 02:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- No, don't add to talk pages. Read WP:TALK. "Wikipedia verified online film distribution and review website": Garbage. There is no such thing. I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but it's bad information. Just stop spamming altogether and everything will be fine. Continue and you will be blocked. Ward3001 (talk) 02:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- BUT I've gone to enormous lengths to make citation via The Auteurs (Website) page to prove that it is a legitimate film distribution and review site. And I presumed that that was verification enough, as there has been no challenge there.--Elijahtmorgan (talk) 02:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Why are Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB allowed to make links?--Elijahtmorgan (talk) 02:20, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- BUT I've gone to enormous lengths to make citation via The Auteurs (Website) page to prove that it is a legitimate film distribution and review site. And I presumed that that was verification enough, as there has been no challenge there.--Elijahtmorgan (talk) 02:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes are acceptable by consensus on Wikipedia. Give me the evidence that the website you wish to add is acceptable by consensus. I need more than just your statement that it is "Wikipedia verified". Please place a link on this talk page to the policy page that allows the website you wish to add. Ward3001 (talk) 02:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- OK sorry again. Wilco. --Elijahtmorgan (talk) 02:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Now I'm lost. How do I apply for consensus? Is this simply not possible at this stage?--Elijahtmorgan (talk) 02:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Seek help at WT:FILM, but be aware that this process can take a while. There is no single person who has editorial control at Wikipedia, which is why decisions are made by consensus. But if you seek help from those who have experience in this area, you might make some headway. Ward3001 (talk) 02:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- OK. Thank you again. Wikipedia can be deeply confusing from a start-up position. I apologize again. I've only previously edited small wikis, not the main shebang. It was never intended to be spam. But I understand your position completely, and can see how it was perceived as such. --Elijahtmorgan (talk) 03:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)